Allahabad High Court
Mahipal Singh And 9 Others vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others on 26 July, 2021
Bench: Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Acting Chief Justice, Ajai Tyagi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 463 of 2021
Appellant :- Mahipal Singh And 9 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Sharad Chandra Singh,Sr. Advocate(Sri Shahsi Nandan )
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,Acting Chief Justice
Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.
(In Re: Civil Misc.Exemption Application No.1 of 2021)
This appeal has been reported to be defective on account of non-filing of certify copy of impugned order dated 22.03.2021. In this behalf, an exemption application has been filed detailing therein reasons due to which certify copy of the order could not be filed.
We are satisfied with the reasons given in the exemption application. Filing of certify copy of impugned order is hereby exempted.
The exemption application is allowed.
Office is directed to allot regular number to the appeal.
(In Re: Special Appeal)
Heard Shri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Sharad Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms.Meenakshi Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4.
By way of this special appeal, a challenge is made to the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 22.03.2021. An application to seek leave to maintain this appeal has been filed.
Learned counsel for the appellants has argued the case at length to question the judgment of learned Single Judge where a direction has been given to respondent No.2 to consider individual cases of appellants. It is submitted that a direction for consideration of the cases of the appellants is without a notice and service of petition thereof. The direction therein rests mainly in reference to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Professor Yashpal and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, 2005 (5) SCC 420. The subsequent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Institution of Mechanical Engineering (India) through its Chairman Vs. State of Punjab and others, Misc. Application No. 2367 of 2018 in Civil Appeal No. 17922 of 2017 dated 13.08.2019 has not been taken note of.
Learned counsel for the appellants however urged that if it is clarified that the notice to the appellants in pursuance to the judgment impugned herein is considered by the respondents in reference to the facts given by the appellants and the judgment, then they need not be press this appeal but necessary clarification needs to be made looking to the observation of the learned Single Judge.
Counsel for the respondents has no objection if a direction is given to consider the reply of the appellants, if submitted pursuant to the notice in reference to the impugned judgment.
Learned Single Judge in fact directed the respondent No.2 therein to take a decision though largely in reference to the judgment of Professor Yashpal (supra) but then if any other judgment exists, it would be considered by the authority.
In the light of the aforesaid, we need not to interfere in the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge but this appeal is disposed of with a clarity that reply to the notice would be considered by the respondents in reference to the issues raised therein and even the judgment referred by the counsel for appellants. The competent authority would apply its mind and pass a speaking order thereupon.
With the aforesaid clarification, the judgment of learned Single Judge would be complied.
Accordingly, we grant leave to maintain this appeal and at the same time, the appeal stands disposed of with liberty to the appellants to submit detailed reply to the notice on all available grounds supported by the judgments, if any. The respondent No.2 would consider all the issues raised therein and pass appropriate order thereupon.
Order Date :- 26.7.2021
Nirmal Sinha
(Ajai Tyagi, J.) (Munishwar Nath Bhandari, A.C.J.)
