Allahabad High Court
Shiva Agnihotri vs State Of U.P. Thru ... on 13 January, 2021
Bench: Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 21
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 909 of 2021
Petitioner :- Shiva Agnihotri
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.State Food & Civil Supplies&Ors
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.P. Singh "Somvanshi"
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shubhra Kumar
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and Smt. Shubhra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 to 4.
Since, the point involved is short and both parties have been heard the petition itself is being finally disposed off instead of keeping it pending unnecessarily.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned order dated 14.01.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1974) on the ground that the Corporation is running in loss.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that father of the petitioner expired on 09.09.2018 during his service tenure. After the demise of his father, he had moved an application for consideration of his candidature for appointment under the Rules, 1974. When no action was taken by the authorities concerned, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 25554 (S/S) of 2019 that had finally been disposed of vide judgment and order of this Court dated 18.09.2019 with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider the case of the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, representation moved by the petitioner has been rejected vide impugned order dated 14.01.2020 on the ground that the Corporation is in loss. It has also been taken as a ground that as per Government Order dated 11.07.2003, appointment under the Rules, 1974 cannot be given to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that this Court, in an identical circumstances, has allowed the Writ Petition No. 7251 (S/S) of 2016 vide its judgment and order dated 05.11.2016 while considering the submissions advanced by the Corporation and Government Order dated 04.07.2003 as well. By the said judgment, it has been held that the ground mentioned in the impugned order i.e. the Corporation is in loss is unsustainable and accordingly, the impugned order in that petition was quashed while remitting the matter to the authorities concerned to consider afresh in the light of the observations made therein within a period of three months.
It has further been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment and order of this Court dated 05.11.2016 passed in Writ Petition No. 7251 (S/S) of 2016. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment and order dated dated 16.03.2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5147 (S/S) of 2018 (Suman Verma Vs. State of U.P. and others).
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4 on the basis of oral instructions has submitted that recently an order dated 17.08.2020 has been issued by the Special Secretary, Government of U.P. to the effect that no further appointment shall be made in the Corporation.
After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, it is found that the order issued by the State Government is almost similar in nature as was the Government Order dated 11.07.2003 restraining the Corporation from making any appointment as the Corporation is in loss. The said Government Order was not accepted by this Court while passing the judgment and order dated 05.11.2016 in Writ Petition No. 7251 (S/S) of 2016. The impugned order dated 14.01.2020 is in contravention of the judgment and orders of this court deciding the identical controversy and that too has not been challenged in the special appeal.
Under these circumstances, the impugned order dated 14.01.2020 is hereby quashed as the same is contrary to law.
The writ petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 16.03.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 5147 (S/S) of 2018. Further, the authorities concerned are directed to pass afresh order in the light of the observation made in the order dated 16.09.2016 passed in Writ Petition No. 2352 (S/S) of 2014 within a period of four months from the date copy of this order is served to the respondent no. 2 i.e. Executive Engineer, U.P. Rajy Karmachari Kalyan Nigam, 742, Jawahar Bhawan, Lucknow. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to provide the copy of the judgment and order dated 16.09.2016 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2352 (S/S) of 2014 and judgment and order dated 16.03.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 5147 (S/S) of 2018 as well along with copy of this order.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021
Ashish
