Allahabad High Court
Bhatkhande Music Instt.'Deemed ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. ... on 2 July, 2013
Bench: Uma Nath Singh, Mahendra Dayal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. 1
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 387 of 2013
Appellant :- Bhatkhande Music Instt.'Deemed University'& ors (2811 S/S 13)
Respondent :- State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt.of Culture & others
Counsel for Appellant :- Vijai Krishna, Amar Singh
Counsel for respondent :- C.S.C., Illigible
Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh, J
Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal,J.
Order(Oral)
We have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the pleadings of Special Appeal.
This Special Appeal has been file against the order dated 16.5.2013 passed in Writ Petition No. 2811 (SS) of 2013, whereby the learned Single Judge has held and directed as:
".... Having heard the respective arguments of the parties, I find that the initial allocation was made to the State of Uttrakhand on 4.9.2013 and thereafter the State Government reviewed the matter at its own level and put that order in abeyance by means of order dated 1.1.2013. The relieving order was in consequence of initial allocation/transfer order. As soon as the transfer order has been stayed, the relieving order has automatically come to an end. The petitioner has also made various representations to the University, but he has not been allowed to work.
In the aforesaid circumstances, till the order passed by the State Government dated 1.1.2013 will continue, the petitioner will be allowed to work on the post in question and he shall be paid his salary."
Learned counsel for the appellants, University, states that the impugned order, though being interim, is in the nature of final order. In support of his case, he has referred to two judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court, (i) State of U.P. and others vs. Ram Sukhi Devi (AIR 2005 SC 284), and (ii) State of U.P. and others vs. Desh Raj (AIR 2007 SC 628). It is also a submission of learned counsel for appellants that respondent No. 2 is drawing salary from the University, although he is working somewhere else, probably at the place of some IAS Officer.
Learned counsel further submits that respondent No. 2 was initially appointed as junior clerk at Almora before the enactment of the U.P. State Reorganization Act, 2000. However, he was transferred from Almora to Bhatkhande Music University. Later, during the course of allocation of cadre by competent Committee, his services were placed at the disposal of the State of Uttrakhand vide the allocation order dated 4.9.2012. The appellants, University, which was only a College at the time of transfer of respondent No. 2 from Uttrakhand to appellants' University, has acquired status of a deemed University, and on direction of the State Government he was immediately relieved. But that nevertheless, the State Government later on kept the allocation order in abeyance vide order dated 1.1.2013 and now respondent no. 2 had no place to work because he was relieved from the appellants, University.
On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents submits that respondent no. 2 has not been paid any salary since September, 2012 when he was relieved vide order dated 10.9.2012. The matter is still pending for final decision by learned Single Judge.
On due consideration, we are not inclined to entertain the Special Appeal for the reasons that the learned Single Judge has only described the status of respondent no. 2, and has not pronounced upon on any point which can be said to have terminated the proceedings finally.
Regarding the aforesaid judgments cited by the learned counsel for appellants, there is no dispute about the ratio laid down therein. However, the ratio has to apply in the given facts and circumstances of the case. The U.P. State Reorganization Act was enacted in 2000 and soon thereafter most of the allocations were completed by the Committee constituted by the Central Government. Admittedly, respondent no. 2 has worked with the appellant University right since 1989 till 10.9.2012 when he has been allocated to the State of Uttrakhand, the said allocation order was kept in abeyance by the State Government soon thereafter on 1.1.2013. Thus, the immediate question before the learned Single Judge is, as to with what means respondent no. 2 would survive if he is not posted to work. Learned Single Judge has only clarified the order passed by the State Government in the interim order and the matter is yet to be finally decided.
The Special Appeal is thus dismissed.
Order Date:- 2.7.2013
anb
