Jiwan Singh S/o Mani Ram, Naintial v Union of India and others

Jiwan Singh S/o Mani Ram, Naintial v Union of India and others

Uttarakhand High Court

 20 June 2013

W.P. No. 56 of 2013 (S/B)

The Judgment was delivered by : Prafulla C. Pant, J.

1. Heard.

2. By means of this petition, moved u/art. 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to take a final decision on the matter of allocation of the petitioner, who is working in the State of Uttarakhand from the period prior to creation of the State.

3. The petitioner is a Bandi Rakshak posted in Sub-Jail Haldwani, District Nainital. U/s. 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000, the Central Government was required to take a decision by a special order or general order allocating an employee either of the successor States, namely, State of Uttarakhand and the successor State of Uttar Pradesh, after the appointed day i.e. 09.11.2000.

4. Earlier, the writ petitioner filed writ petition no.491 of 2012 (S/B) in which the prayer was made for relieving the petitioner for State of Uttar Pradesh but the same was dismissed for the reason that there was no mention made by the petitioner in the said petition that he had been allocated the State of Uttar Pradesh.

5. In the above circumstances, petitioner filed a fresh writ petition (present writ petition) seeking a direction to respondents to take a final decision in the matter of allocation of the petitioner.

6. Vide order dated 22.02.2013, the respondents were directed to file their counter affidavits. Respondent nos.2 and 3 have already filed their counter affidavit on 22.4.2013.

7. Today, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1, which is taken on record. In paragraph no.6 of the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of Union of India, it has been disclosed that as per the final allocation list issued by the Department of Personnel, Government of India, vide orders dated 09.05.2005 and 08.12.2005, several Bandi Rakshaks were allocated to the State of Uttarakhand. It has further been disclosed that all other Bandi Rakshaks, who were working in the State of Uttarakhand on 09.11.2000, and whose names did not figure in those Lists, stood allocated to State of Uttar Pradesh (Copies of allocation orders have been filed as Annexure Nos.3 and 4 to the counter affidavit filed by respondent no.1). Annexure no.4 to the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the Union of India, makes it very clear that vide order dated 8.12.2005, Department of Personnel of Government of India has clarified that all those, whose names did not figure in the Final Allocation List for State of Uttarakhand, they stood allocated to the State of Uttar Pradesh. This order has been issued by the Government of India in exercise of powers under sub-s. (2) of S. 73 of the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000.

8. In view of the above fact brought on record by respondent no.1, it is the duty of respondent nos.2 and 3 to relieve the petitioner forthwith from the State of Uttarakhand for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

9. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner has stated in the writ petition that he has been denied promotion in the State of Uttarakhand on the ground that he has not been allocated to this State, and on the other hand, he is not being relieved for the State of Uttar Pradesh where juniors to him have already been promoted.

10. In the above circumstances and in view of the fact stated in paragraph no.6 of the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the Union of India, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent nos.2 and 3 to relieve the petitioner for the State of Uttar Pradesh within a period of one month from today. (Interim relief application no.1082 of 2013 and Misc. application no.6041/2013 stand disposed of)

Petition disposed of

Tags: , , , ,


Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: