Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1878 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lakshmi Narayan Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sasmita Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dinesh Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Following orders were passed in the matter on 14.2.2019:-
"Petitioner's claim has been examined by the Regional Level Committee in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3474 of 2018, decided on 2nd April, 2018, by the order dated 22nd November, 2018, which is impugned in the present writ. This order records that petitioner's appointment was not validly approved and that the approval order which is being relied upon by the petitioner was actually issued in respect of some other matter.
The basic issue, on facts, is as to whether the approval order was passed in favour of the petitioner on 24th November, 2000 bearing Office No. 5391-92. The Dispatch Clerk has appeared before the Committee and has confirmed issuance of this letter in favour of the petitioner. However, in the Dispatch Register, an endorsement is made that this Office Order has been issued in respect of a direction issued in Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980. Taking note of such fact, the order impugned is passed observing that issuance of approval order is doubtful and not established. The claim of petitioner has been rejected accordingly.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time of initial hearing contended that the approval order was in-fact related to the present petitioner and that the Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980 was inadvertently mentioned in the Dispatch Register.
While entertaining the writ petition, following orders were passed on 7.2.2019:-
"Let this matter appear as fresh once again on 14.2.2019, in order to enable the learned counsel for the parties to address the Court on the aspect relating to relevance of Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980."
It appears that learned counsel for the petitioner has made an application before the Registry to find out details with regard to Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980. A note appears to have been put, as per which, the last writ petition of the year 1980, as per district-wise statement, bears No. 11634 of 1980, and that no such writ petition as Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980 exists in the records.
A note of the Deputy Registrar, in response to the letter of petitioner's counsel, has been placed before the Court, by the office. However, before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to direct the Registry to submit a specific report, as to whether, any Writ Petition No. 15378 of 1980 was filed before this Court, or not. The office would also clarify as to how the office note is placed before the Court even without any direction of the Court.
Learned Standing Counsel may obtain instructions in respect of the averments made in the writ petition. Put up in the additional cause list on 25.2.2019 alongwith the records of Writ Petition No. 48431 of 2015."
Pursuant to the aforesaid directions issued the Registry has submitted a report as per which no writ petition bearing number 15378 of 1980 was filed before this Court and that the last writ petition of the year 1980 pertaining to Writ-A (Service Matter) was Writ Petition No.11634 of 1980.
From the instructions received by the learned Standing Counsel also it transpires that the only ground to non-suit petitioner's claim is that in the dispatch register the order allegedly issued to petitioner granting him financial approval is alleged to relate to someone else. The basis of this conclusion is the fact that in the dispatch register reference of Writ Petition No.15378 of 1980 is made. The person who appears to have signed the dispatch register has also appeared before the concerned authority and supported the claim of petitioner that such letter was in fact issued in respect of the petitioner only.
From the facts which have been placed before the Court, it is clear that the factual premise on which petitioner's claim has been non-suited i.e. approval order was not issued to the petitioner and that a different communication was issued pertaining to Writ Petition No.15378 of 1980 against the dispatch number is not liable to be sustained. Once such a writ petition does not exist and the concerned clerk has otherwise supported the claim of petitioner, the ground taken to non-suit petitioner's claim cannot be accepted. Approval cannot be ignored merely for the reason that in the dispatch register reference is made to Writ Petition No.15378 of 1980.
In that view of the matter, the order impugned dated 22.11.2018, passed by respondent no.2, cannot be sustained and stands quashed. The authority concerned shall re-consider the matter in light of the observations made above, by passing a reasoned order, within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Ashok Kr.