Heard Sri Rakesh Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for opposite party no. 1 and Sri Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
Notices for opposite party no. 3 has been accepted by Sri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary.
By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to take decision regarding merger of the services of the petitioner in U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. on the post of Assistant Engineer. He has further prayed that the opposite parties be directed not to relieve the petitioner from U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. until decision is taken on merger of the petitioner.
At the outset Sri Shishir Jain has submitted that Annexure no. 1 of the writ petition clearly indicates that the period of deputation of the petitioner at the Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. has already been completed. He has shown a letter dated 26.2.2020 issued by the Managing Director, Rajkiya Nirman Agency who is the parent department of the petitioner whereby the request has been made from Rajkiya Nirman Nigam to relieve 8 employees including the petitioner for their parent department, the same is taken on record. The perusal of the aforesaid letter reveals that the parent department is requesting that the petitioner be repatriated to the parent department, therefore, the question of merger would not take place.
Learned Standing Counsel has also adopted such objection so raised by Sri Shishir Jain that since the parent department has requested the department where the petitioner is serving for his repatriation, therefore, the question of merger has lost its efficacy.
On that learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure no. 7 which is a letter dated 2.6.2016 preferred by the Cooperative Department addressed to the opposite party no. 3 i.e. Managing Director, U.P. Rajya Nirman Sahkari Sangh Limited, Lucknow wherein the reference of merger of the services of the petitioner is given. Thereafter the opposite party no. 3 has issued a letter dated 30.6.2016, Annexure no. 8 to the writ petition, to U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. providing no objection if the services of the petitioner is merged in UPRNN, therefore, as per learned counsel for the petitioner the issue is pending before the State Government in respect of merger of services of the petitioner, so any appropriate decision may be taken by the Principal Secretary for which he has preferred representation which is Annexure no. 11 to the writ petition.
Sri Shishir Jain, learned counsel has submitted that the aforesaid correspondences in respect of merger of services of the petitioner are of the year 2016 and now the decision has been taken by the parent department for repatriation of the petitioner in the month of February, 2020, therefore, the issue of merger of service in UPRNN may not be liable to be considered.
Be that as it may, since the petitioner has yet not been informed by the competent authority of the State Government about the fate of the issue of the merger of the petitioner, therefore, the appropriate decision should be taken by the State Government so that the controversy of merger of services of the petitioner at UPRNN could be set at rest.
Accordingly the liberty is given to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation taking all pleas and grounds which are available to him to the Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, the opposite party no. 1 within 15 days and as soon as the said representation is preferred by the petitioner within aforesaid stipulated time the Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow shall take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months and decision thereof be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.1.2021/Om [Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.]