Umesh Chandra Trivedi And 17 Ors. vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Cane ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2611 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5093 of 2017
 

 
Petitioner :- Umesh Chandra Trivedi And 17 Ors.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Cane And Sugar Industries And Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Dubey,Ram Shankar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit dated 24.1.2023 filed today by the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Kaushlendra Yadav, is taken on record.

Heard Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Kaushlendra Yadav learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Anjani Kumar Rai, learned brief holder for the respondents State.

Learned Senior Advocate Sri O.P. Srivastava has submitted that the controversy involved in the present case has been decided in Writ Petition No.352 (S/B) of 2014: Dinesh Kumar Sharma and 10 others. Vs. State of U.P. and others, decided on 18.5.2016. He has further submitted that the case of the petitioner is at par with the case of the aforesaid writ petitioners and he prays that the benefits of the said judgment may also be extended to the present petitioners.

He has further submitted that against the said order, special leave petition has been filed before the Supreme Court by the State of U.P. and leave has been granted and the same has been converted into the Civil Appeal No.1080 of 2017 (The State of Uttar Pradesh and another. Vs. Dinesh Kumar Sharma & others.) which is pending before the Supreme Court. In paragraph-4 of the aforesaid supplementary affidavit of the petitioner, it has been submitted that the judgment of the High Court has not been stayed and aforesaid civil appeal before the Supremem Court is pending for disposal.

On the other hand, Sri Anjani Kumar Rai, learned brief holder for the respondents State has submitted that the case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid judgment dated 18.5.2016 passed in the Writ Petition No.352 (S/B) of 2014 (supra). He has further stated that the present petition may also be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

In view of the aforesaid facts, the present petition is disposed in terms of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 18.5.2016 (supra) and the petitioners are also granted the benefit of the said judgment. It is needless to say that the benefit of the order dated 18.5.2016 to the present petitioners will be subject to decision in the aforesaid Civil Appeal No.1080 of 2017 by the Supreme Court.

Order Date :- 24.1.2023

Rajneesh JR-PS)