Naubasta Baradevi Auto Riksha ... vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 3895 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 29
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8944 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Naubasta Baradevi Auto Riksha Owners Association And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vindesh Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Alok Mishra,Sanjeev Kumar Yadav
 
AND
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9648 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Kanpur Tempo Taxi Karmchari Sabha And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vindesh Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Alok Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

Heard Shri Vindesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Prashant Mathur, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Shri Alok Mishra for respondent nos. 4 and 5.

Petitioners claim themselves to be a registered association of Auto Rickshaw Owners, Three Wheelers Auto Owners, Kanpur Tempo Taxi Karmchari Sabha and Pragatisheel Tempo Taxi Karamchari Sangh operating their business in the city of Kanpur Nagar and their primary grievance is that no facilities/amenities are being provided by the respondents as per the decision of this court in Writ-C No. 19014 of 2012 decided on 19.10.2012.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon a judgment of this court in Writ-C No.26971 of 2020 decided on 13.1.2021 whereby in identical scenario the matter was referred to the Secretary, Local Bodies, Government of U.P who was directed to address the grievance of the petitioners therein after obtaining feed back from the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Kanpur Nagar and District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.

We are informed by Shri Y.K.Saxena, learned counsel for the Caveator that pursuant to the directions of this court dated 13.1.2021, the State Government has constituted a committee vide communication dated 22.2.2021 for redressal of such grievance, which is also authenticated by Shri Prashant Mathur, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. They accordingly submit that there is no justification to pass a fresh substantive order in favour of petitioners as in the event the petitioners have any grievance they may approach the committee constituted under the orders of the State Government which shall examine their grievance alongwith other identically situated aggrieved persons.

The stand taken by learned counsel for the caveator and the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears to be eminently just and equitable.

We dispose of both these petitions with the direction that in the event petitioners approach the committee concerned, the said committee shall also examine the issues and grievance raised by the petitioners in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible .

Order Date :- 18.3.2021

RS