Allahabad High Court
Brij Pal (In Wria 3874 Of 2022) vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 1 July, 2022
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra, Om Prakash Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 5
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 309 of 2022
Appellant :- Brij Pal (In Wria 3874 Of 2022)
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Energy Govt. Of U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Appellant :- D.K. Singh Chauhan,Mahendra Bahadur Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vashu Deo Mishra
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.
(1) Hear Shri M.B. Singh, alongwith Shri D.K. Singh, for the appellant and Shri Vashu Deo Mishra appearing for the Opposite party nos.2 to 5.
(2) This Special Appeal has been filed under Chapter VIII Rule-5 of the Rules of the Court against an order dated 23.06.2022 passed by the Writ Court in Writ-A No.3874 of 2022 [Brij Pal Vs. State of U.P. & Others].
(3) This Court has heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length on the maintainability of the Special Appeal against the order dated 23.06.2022.
(4) Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon a Full Bench decision of this Court reported in 2015 (4) Education and Service Cases 2008 (All) (FB) Ashutosh Shrotriya and Others Vs. Vice-Chancellor, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University and Others. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon Paragraphs-35 and 37 of such judgment to say that an interlocutory order if it decides a matter of moment, or affects the valuable rights of the parties and works serious prejudice to the parties concerned would constitute a "Judgment" and would be amenable to a Special Appeal and even a purely procedural order of a nature which calls only for exchange of pleadings between the parties, would be amenable to a Special Appeal if the Division Bench is satisfied that non-grant of interim relief at the stage of listing of the case as fresh for hearing would affect the vital and valuable rights.
(5) It is the case of the appellant that he was issued a Charge-sheet on 09.04.2015 with regard to the non-return of certain receipts books that were issued to him. The appellant retired on 31.12.2016 as Clerk in the office of the Opposite party no.5. The appellant submitted his reply on 27.08.2018 to the said Charge-sheet saying that he has returned all the receipts books to the concerned Clerk. A report was called for from the Opposite party no.5 on which it was stated that no comments were possible as the records relating to the office had been burnt down in a huge fire. The appellant having submitted photocopies of the receipt books that he had allegedly not returned. Comments were again called for from the Opposite party no.5. The Opposite party no.5 wrote to the Opposite party no.4 on 03.09.2021 that a verification had been done and it was found that there was no irregularity having been committed by the appellant. However, despite such favourable comments from the Opposite party no.5 a punishment order was issued against the appellant on 18.12.2020 forfeiting 20% of his Pension. The appellant filed an Appeal which Appeal was dismissed on 11.02.2022. The appellant filed a Review which was also dismissed on 20.04.2022. Against such orders the appellant had approached the Writ Court and prayed for interim relief of stay of operation of the orders impugned instead of looking into the pleadings on record, the writ Court had only passed an order directing the respondents to file counter affidavit.
(6) This Court has perused the Writ Court's order dated 23.06.2022 which is being quoted hereinbelow:-
"Let counter affidavit be filed by respondents within a period of three weeks. Two weeks, thereafter is granted to learned counsel for the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit.
Put up this case in the week commencing 25.07.2022. Office is directed to list this case within top 20 cases."
(7) It is apparent from a perusal of the order passed by the Writ-Court that such order which is procedural in nature asking for a response from the Respondents and also directing the matter to be listed in the week commencing 25.07.2022 within top ten cases of the Board, cannot be said to be an order which affects the valuable rights of the appellant in any manner.
(8) The Special Appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.
Order Date :- 1.7.2022
PAL
