Allahabad High Court
Shobhit Kumar Mittal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 4 August, 2023
Bench: J.J. Munir
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157251
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20033 of 2014
Petitioner :- Shobhit Kumar Mittal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Saran,In Person
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This writ petition has been filed seeking notional promotion and re-fixation of pay as a sequel to reversions of reserved category candidates pursuant to the orders passed by the Supreme Court in U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar and others (2012) 7 SCC 1. Mr. Devansh Mishra, Advocate had been appointed amicus curiae to assist the Court in the case because the petitioner was appearing in person and this Court thought that he was not able to represent his case.
2. Today, Mr. Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appeared on behalf of the State and brought to this Court's notice various orders passed by the Supreme Court in Contempt Petition (C) No. 214 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 2679 of 2011. One of the orders dated 20.08.2015 provides:
"It is submitted by Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, learned counsel for the State of U.P. that the judgment passed in U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar, shall be complied with in letter and spirit within three weeks hence and the officers, who are to be reverted shall be reverted and they shall not be given any kind of additional charge. The Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh shall file an affidavit by 15th September, 2015, stating that the same has been done, failing which this Court may be compelled to direct his personal appearance. No further adjournment or extension of time shall be granted on that score.
Be it added, the High Court shall not entertain any kind of petition with regard to the controversy that is covered in the decision rendered in U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd. (supra) or even linked with it.
The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to the Registrar General of the High Court of Allahabad, to be placed before the learned Chief Justice so that he can do the needful in the matter.
List the matters on 15th September, 2015."
(Emphasis by Court)
3. The attention of this Court has further been drawn to the order dated 13.10.2015, passed in the aforesaid contempt matter by their Lordships, where it is observed:
"Be it noted, it has been stated in the affidavit that if anyone is grieved by the order of reversion or in case of any grievance that a person ought to have been reverted, if raised, shall be decided on top priority by the State Government. We inquired from Mr. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the State that who would be the competent authority who will decide it, learned counsel has submitted that he has instructions to state that Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, State of U.P., shall decide the same. If anyone is grieved by the decision taken by the said authority, the said person is entitled to file an interlocutory application before this Court in the disposed of Civil Appeal No.2608 of 2011 and connected appeals, so that suitable order can be passed. The purpose of stating so is that no other court shall entertain the challenge to the grievance of any person."
(Emphasis by Court)
4. Learned Additional Advocate General has also drawn this Court's attention to the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in the said Contempt Petition by the Supreme Court, where it has been directed:
"It is contended by Mr. Mehrotra that there are around one thousand representations/grievance petitions and a singular authority is not in a position to take the decision on the same. It is urged by him that instead of Principal Secretary , Department of Personnel, State of U. P., it may be substituted as Principal Secretary/Head of the Department in respect of employees of the State, and the Managing Director of the Corporations (Competent Authority/Appointing Authority) who shall decide the petitions in respect of the employees of the Corporation. The said prayer is accepted.
At this juncture, it is necessary to further add that anyone who shall make a representation mitigating its grievance, shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing and the concerned authority, as mentioned hereinabove, shall decide the same within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. The persons who have not submitted the representation mitigating their grievance, may submit the petitions/representations within four weeks hence. Anyone who is grieved by the decision of the competent authority, will be entitled to file an application in the disposed of Civil Appeal and other connected appeals, as has been mentioned in the earlier order."
5. In view of the aforesaid orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the issue involved in this petition is one that this Court cannot touch or go into. The petitioner's remedy is to approach the Principal Secretary or Head of the Department concerned in the first instance, and, in the event, he is aggrieved by the order made on his representation, it would be open to the petitioner to approach their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the manner directed. This Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present writ petition.
6. It is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
Order Date :- 4.8.2023
Deepak
