Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 226 of 2019 Appellant :- Om Pal Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Pramod Kumar Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners-appellants, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Arvind Kumar Goswami, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4.
The petitioners-appellants were working as Jail Warden in the State of U.P. Under the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000, they were allocated to the State of Uttarakhand vide final allocation list dated 9.5.2005. In pursuance of the said allocation after prolonged litigation, the petitioners-appellants were relieved from the State of U.P. on 7.7.2012, 19.7.2012 and 30.10.2012 respectively, but even then they failed to join duties in the State of Uttarakhand. There is no dispute to the fact that all their efforts to challenge the allocation dated 9.5.2005 had failed, and in that Special Appeal Defective No. 683 of 2015, Raj Kumar Sharma and 4 Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and 9 Ors., the Court directed the authorities to look into the matter again in the light of the decision in Writ A No. 3636 of 2005, Jagdish Narayan Doharey Vs. State of U.P. and others. The representation of the petitioners-appellants to allow them to continue functioning in the State of U.P. in view of the decision of the Jagdish Narayan Doharey which provided that those employees who were allocated to the State of Uttarakhand but who for some legal impediment or administrative ground were unable to join, may be allowed to continue to function in the State of U.P., was rejected by the Principal Secretary vide order dated 15.9.2017. The challenge to the said order by the petitioners-appellants had failed and the writ court dismissed the petition vide order dated 18.1.2019 holding that the final list dated 9.5.2005 by which the petitioners-appellants were allocated to the State of Uttarakhand had attained finality and it is conclusive as such the petitioners-appellants were not entitled to any relief.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners-appellants is that the petitioners-appellants are entitled to the benefit accorded by the Court in the case of Jagdish Narayan Doharey and that since the petitioners-appellants continue to be working in the State of U.P. in view of the Government Order issued in pursuance thereof, they are entitled to remain in U.P. This argument has been repelled by the Principal Secretary by stating that in Jagdish Narayan Doharey's case and in the Government Order issued on it's basis, only those employees who could not join the allocated State for some legal impediment or administrative ground alone were entitled to continue in service in the State where they were already working. The said decision or the Government Order would not apply to the petitioners-appellants, who had been allocated to the State of Uttarakhand vide order dated 9.5.2005 and had been relieved in the year 2012 itself. At that time, there was neither any legal impediment nor administrative ground which may have permitted them to not join at Uttarakhand. Since the petitioners- appellants had been already relieved much before the decision of the Jagdish Narayan Doharey's case and before the issuance Government Order on it's basis, they had no option but to join duties in the allocated State of Uttarakhand.
We are in full agreement with the reasoning given by the Principal Secretary and find that the learned Single Judge has not erred in dismissing the writ petition.
The special appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Prakhar