Allahabad High Court
Smt.Arti Gupta vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 12 January, 2021
Bench: Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34223 of 2018
Petitioner :- Smt.Arti Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Akshay Mohiley
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Devi Prasad Mishra
with
Writ-C Nos. 1087 of 2019, 1117 of 2019, 2380 of 2019, 2928 of 2019, 3085 of 2019, 3315 of 2019, 3917 of 2019, 4432 of 2019, 21657 of 2019, 21658 of 2019, 22000 of 2019, 22003 of 2019, 22650 of 2019, 23400 of 2019, 24693 of 2019, 24698 of 2019, 25687 of 2019, 25841 of 2019, 25868 of 2019, 29459 of 2019, 29783 of 2019, 30769 of 2019, 31165 of 2019, 31393 of 2019, 31620 of 2019, 32098 of 2019, 32170 of 2019, 32474 of 2019, 32596 of 2019, 32605 of 2019, 33115 of 2019, 33116 of 2019, 33434 of 2019, 33483 of 2019, 33828 of 2019, 33896 of 2019, 33902 of 2019, 33975 of 2019, 34012 of 2019, 34782 of 2019, 34827 of 2019, 35596 of 2019, 35828 of 2019, 35854 of 2019, 36493 of 2019, 39309 of 2019, 39319 of 2019, 39749 of 2019, 40547 of 2019, 40706 of 2019, 40958 of 2019, 41574 of 2019, 41579 of 2019, 43199 of 2019, 43209 of 2019, 43 of 2020, 125 of 2020, 936 of 2020, 1160 of 2020, 1345 of 2020, 1372 of 2020, 1385 of 2020, 2090 of 2020, 2384 of 2020, 3285 of 2020, 4034 of 2020, 4123 of 2020, 4206 of 2020, 4762 of 2020, 5123 of 2020, 5136 of 2020, 5540 of 2020, 5825 of 2020, 5836 of 2020, 6057 of 2020, 6059 of 2020, 6197 of 2020, 6208 of 2020, 6239 of 2020, 6998 of 2020, 7226 of 2020, 7412 of 2020, 8617 of 2020, 8799 of 2020, 10412 of 2020, 10419 of 2020, 11695 of 2020, 11864 of 2020, 11867 of 2020, 12085 of 2020, 12089 of 2020, 12631 of 2020, 12636 of 2020, 12811 of 2020, 13285 of 2020, 13704 of 2020, 14544 of 2020, 14607 of 2020, 14621 of 2020, 14635 of 2020, 14801 of 2020, 14875 of 2020, 15454 of 2020, 16241 of 2020, 16623 of 2020, 17380 of 2020, 18377 of 2020, 20272 of 2020, 20347 of 2020, 20863 of 2020, 21104 of 2020, 22159 of 2020 and 22591 of 2020
Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,J.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
By this batch of writ petitions, a challenge is made to the imposition of sub-division charges by the respondents and in a few writ petitions, even challenge is made on the rate for the sub-division charges.
The controversy regarding imposition of sub-division charges, apart from other charges, came for consideration before this Court and decided in the case of Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2014 (1) ADJ 325 (DB). The levy of sub-division charges was held to be illegal. The State preferred an appeal against the said judgment before the Apex Court where an interim order has been passed.
During the pendency of the appeal before the Apex Court, this Court decided a bunch of writ petitions led by the case of Smt. Sandhya Vs. State of U.P., Writ C No. 61696 of 2017 vide judgment dated 08.05.2018. The judgment in the case of Sandhya has also been stayed by the Apex Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for a decision of the writ petitions on merit ignoring the fact that the controversy is now pending consideration before the Apex Court and judgment therein would govern the issue and otherwise the judgment in the case of Rekha Rani (supra) was given after addressing the merit of the case and is pending consideration before the Apex Court.
In view of the above, so far as the controversy regarding demand of sub-division charges by respondents is concerned, the controversy would be governed by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rekha Rani (supra) and other connected appeals, thus, keeping these matters pending would be unnecessary and if it is decided on merit, as prayed, it would involve further litigation in the shape of appeals before the Apex Court despite a fact that an interim order has been passed in the case of Rekha Rani (supra).
In view of the above, we are applying better option so as to avoid further litigation by way of an appeal and settle the controversy and accordingly, the batch of writ petitions are ordered to be governed by the outcome of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rekha Rani (supra) and other connected matters and with the aforesaid, the controversy involved in the writ petitions in reference to the challenge to the levy of sub-division charges are decided.
In a few writ petitions, even the petitioners have challenged the rate on which sub-divisional charges has been imposed.
Since the levy of sub-division charges itself is under challenge and would be decided by the Apex Court in pending appeals, thus, the issue is kept open and needs to be addressed only if the appeal in the case of Rekha Rani (supra) is allowed and otherwise if the judgment of this Court is upheld by the Apex Court, sub-division charges can not be levied. The controversy towards rate would be inconsequential in that case.
Thus, issue aforesaid is kept open subject to the final outcome of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rekha Rani (supra). It can be taken afresh.
All the writ petitions are disposed of with aforesaid.
This order has been passed to avoid multiplication of litigation in the shape of appeals before the Apex Court which otherwise would be on a decision of the writ petitions on merit.
Order Date :- 12.1.2021
//Nirmal//
