Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar Verma vs State Of U.P.Through ... on 16 August, 2022
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3223 of 2002
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Prin.Secy.Revenue
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Ali,Amrendra Nath Tripathi,Onkar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,I.B.Singh
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned ACSC for respondent - State.
2. Facts of the case are that the petitioners were engaged as Junior Census Clerk on daily wage basis on following dates:
a) petitioner No.1 on 04.10.2000
b) petitioner No.2 on 15.11.2000
c) petitioner Nos.3, 4 & 5 on 08.12.2000
3. They requested for their absorption in the Census Department and when no action was taken, they filed Writ Petition No.2372 of 2001, wherein direction was issued for consideration of their representation for absorption. In compliance of order of this Court dated 16.05.2001, the claim setup by the petitioners was rejected, which is Annexure-9 to the writ petition.
4. The order dated 27.06.2001 rejecting their claim was subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No.3126 (S/S) of 2001, which was allowed setting aside the impugned order with a direction to reconsider the claim setup by the petitioners. When no action was taken, the petitioners filed contempt petition No.252 of 2002, wherein notice was issued to the opposite parties that why they may not be punished for not deciding the representation of the petitioners in the light of direction contained in the judgment dated 23.11.2001.
5. Thereafter, the State Government issued direction to the District Magistrate on 02.03.2002 to take decision on its own level. Then, the District Magistrate took a decision on 28.02.2002 and 04.03.2002 for absorption of services of the petitioners on the post of Junior Census Clerk and in pursuance thereof, they are discharging their duties.
6. Vide impugned order dated 22.05.2002, absorption of the petitioners has been cancelled on the basis of order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a separate selection proceeding, wherein the issue of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Amendment) Act, 2001 was involved.
7. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned order has been passed without giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Statement of fact has been made in this regard in paragraph 17(b) of the writ petition.
8. His next submission is that the order, which has been referred in the impugned order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, pertains to a separate selection proceeding, which has no concern with the selection of the petitioners. Therefore, without analyzing the correct position, the impugned order has wrongly been passed.
9. He further submitted that while entertaining the writ petition, this Court has passed an interim order on 06.06.2002 staying the impugned order until further orders, which is being quoted below:
"Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to delete the name of opposite party No.4 from the petition.
Learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of opposite party Nos.1 to 3. He prays for and is granted six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. learned counsel for the petitioners is granted two weeks thereafter for filing Rejoinder affidavit.
Till further orders of the court, operation of order dated 22.5.2002 passed by opposite party No.2, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, shall remain stayed."
10. He next submitted that service of petitioner No.5 has been regularized vide order dated 16.07.2019. He lastly submitted that the petitioners are discharging their duties in compliance of interim order granted by this Court.
11. On the other hand, learned A.C.S.C. submitted that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and is just and valid order. He further submitted that the impugned order has been passed in compliance of the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, wherein till further orders of the Court, the appointment or promotion on Class III post has been stayed.
12. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
13. On perusal of statement of fact made in paragraph 17(b) of the writ petition, reply to which has been given in paragraph 3 of the supplementary counter affidavit, the averment in regard to violation of principles of natural justice has been found to be admitted by the respondents.
14. I have also perused the order quoted in the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which shows that it is in regard to same selection proceeding initiated in pursuance to executive order and result of selection of Group "C" post was stayed.
15. On bare perusal, it is evident that it is not in respect of absorption of the petitioners. Even otherwise, in case there was some discrepancy in the order of absorption, the petitioners would have been afforded opportunity of hearing prior to passing of impugned order.
16. Moreover, in case there was some order of Hon'ble Supreme Court, on the said basis, the respondents would have proceeded to approach Hon'ble writ court to review the order passed in regard to the petitioners.
17. On bare perusal of impugned order, it is evident that the District Magistrate, Kheri has reviewed its own order of absorption of petitioners. In case the petitioners have not obtained the order by fraud or manipulation, the District Magistrate was not having power to review the earlier order of absorption.
18. In view of reasons recorded above, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed.
19. The impugned order dated 22.05.2002 is hereby quashed.
20. However, the petitioners shall be allowed to discharge their duties on the post of Junior Census Clerk and shall be paid salary and all consequential benefits in pursuance thereof.
Order Date :- 16.8.2022
Adarsh K Singh
