Allahabad High Court
Head Constable Anand Prakash ... vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. ... on 20 July, 2021
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 18
1. Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 7301 of 2014
Petitioner :- Head Constable Anand Prakash Tiwari & 10 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhupendra,D.M.Tripathi,Gaurav Mehrotra,Santosh Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
2. Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 25078 of 2018
Petitioner :- Constable Dileep Kumar Shukla
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home. & Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
3. Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 17419 of 2016
Petitioner :- Constable Mohd. Israel
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Deomani Tripathi,Anand Shanker Asthana,Ashwani Kumar Singh Ratho
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
4. Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 30593 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ali Ahmad And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Mehrotra,Ishita Yadu
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
And
5. Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 4474 of 2011
Petitioner :- Balram Singh And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home, Civil Se
Counsel for Petitioner :- I.P.Singh,Anurag Srivastava,Rakesh Chandra Tewari,Ratnesh Kumar Rawat
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
All the aforesaid writ petitions raising common question of law and facts have been heard together and are being decided by this common order. For deciding the bunch of writ petitions, the facts of Writ Petition No.7301 (SS) of 2014 have been taken.
Present petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to include the names of the petitioners in the fresh select list which has been prepared in compliance to the judgment dated 18.07.2014 passed by the Apex Court.
A preliminary objection had been taken by learned Standing Counsel that considering the order of the Apex Court dated 10.08.2015 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.25377-25378 of 2014 in re: Qamar Hasan Khan and others vs. State of U.P. and others, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure SCA-3 to the supplementary counter affidavit dated 02.02.2019, whereby the Apex Court has specifically directed that no Court shall entertain any grievance relating to the particular selection, present petitions may not be maintainable.
Incidentally, present petition pertains to the selection for the post of Sub-Inspector Civil Police Rankers which admittedly was the selection for which the Apex Court has passed an order dated 10.08.2015, as already indicated above.
Earlier upon the learned counsel for the petitioners being confronted with the said judgment on 18.09.2019, he had sought some time to indicate as to how despite the order of the Apex Court dated 10.08.2015 present petition is maintainable.
Today, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.28838 of 2019 in re: Satyabrat Chaudhary and others vs. State of U.P. and others, had been filed before the Apex Court seeking clarification of the order dated 10.08.2015 whereby a restriction had been placed by the Apex Court restraining any Court from entertaining any grievance relating to the said selection. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a few of the petitioners of the present petition were also there in the connected matters before the Apex Court. He also contends that the Apex Court vide order dated 02.12.2020 passed in the aforesaid Special Leave to Appeal has not issued any clarification and has dismissed the SLP. Learned counsel for the petitioners also contends that despite the aforesaid embargo various petitions were filed before this Court and the said petitions were entertained and specific orders have been passed including in the special appeal before this Court.
Be that as it may, considering the aforesaid situation and the specific embargo placed by the Apex Court in its order dated 10.08.2015 passed in Special Leave to Appeal No.25377-25378 of 2014, there would not be any occasion for this Court to entertain the present petitions. Accordingly, the preliminary objection as raised by learned Standing Counsel is upheld and the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.7.2021
A. Katiyar
