SPA/428/2021
2022 Latest Caselaw 2737 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                  COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  SPA of 428 of 2021
                                  Shri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
                                  Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.

Mr. Nandan Arya and Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Vikas Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the respondent nos.5 and 6.

Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned counsel for respondent no.7.

This special appeal is directed against the judgment dated 03.08.2021 in WPSS No.974 of 2021. The learned Single Judge while passing the impugned judgment has taken a view that the appellant / petitioner had an alternate efficacious remedy before the State Public Services Tribunal, constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Services Tribunal Act, 1976 and on that premise proceeded to hold that in case the dispute raised by the appellant/petitioner is not resolved with the decision on her representation dated 30.03.2021, the Court shall not entertain a subsequent writ-petition on the subject matter on the ground that it is in sequel to the writ-petition in question. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant was serving as a senior-most Lecturer in Anandmayi Seva Sadan Municipality Mahila Inter College, Haridwar. The said college is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the State Public Services Tribunal.

The learned counsel for the respondents, particularly, respondent no.5 does not dispute this position. Therefore,

the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside as it proceeds on factually wrong premises that the petitioner had an alternate efficacious remedy before the State Public Services Tribunal.

We, accordingly, set aside the limitation placed on the right of the appellant to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India after her representation dated 30.03.2021 were to be decided. The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid premises.

(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (Vipin Sanghi, C.J.) 30.08.2022 SS/RB