Union Of India And 3 Others vs Shilpi Devi And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 1892 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20800 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Union Of India And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- Shilpi Devi And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Om
 

 
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Union of India.

By the instant writ petition, petitioner seeks the following relief:

"To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 14.9.2021 passed by learned Tribunal in O.A. No. 330/209 of 2017 (Shilip Devi vs. Union of India and others)."

On specific query, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in question has already been considered and decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ-A No. 9218 of 2021 (Union of India and others vs. Vimal Kumar and another). Operative portion of the order is extracted:

"10. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and have perused the order passed by the Tribunal as well as by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ A No. 49864 of 2017, which deals with identical issue. We find that the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ A No.49864 of 2017 has examined all aspects of the matter and has taken a well considered view that since the basis of the order of termination is the direction of higher authority upon discovery of alleged irregularities in the appointment, the procedure provided by Rule 4 of the GDS Rules, 2011 would get attracted as per which an opportunity of hearing is to be accorded to the affected person. In the instant case, admittedly, no opportunity of hearing was given to the first respondent and the procedure prescribed by Rule 4 of the GDS Rules, 2011 was not followed therefore, the Tribunal following the decision of the Division Bench passed the impugned order. As the Tribunal has followed the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court which is not demonstrated to have been set aside or stayed by the Apex Court, upon an appeal, if any, taken by the petitioners, and no demonstrable error in the view taken by the Division Bench could be pointed out to us, we do not find any such error in the order of the Tribunal so as to warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In so far as the contention that the first respondent ought not to have been allowed consequential benefits of quashment of the order of termination is concerned, in our view, it is not sustainable because nothing has been shown to us that in the interregnum the first respondent was gainfully employed elsewhere. In fact, from the impugned judgment of the Tribunal it does not appear that any such plea was even raised there.

11. In view of the reasons recorded above, the petition is dismissed summarily. "

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter can be disposed of in terms of the said judgment.

In view thereof, the writ petition is dismissed in terms of the decision rendered in Union of India vs. Vimal Kumar and others (supra).

Order Date :- 18.1.2023

S.Prakash