Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Rakesh Kumar Tiwari on 9 August, 2019
Bench: Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Sanjiv Khanna
1
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
17925-17928/2019
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-05-2019
in SA No. 192/2019, SA No. 194/2019, SA No. 199/2019 & SA No.
200/2019 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench)
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
RAKESH KUMAR TIWARI ETC. ETC. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.111071/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
O.T. )
Date : 09-08-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ankit Goel, AOR
Mr. Atul Kumar, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Kedar Nath Tripathy, AOR
Mr. A.K. Yadav, Adv.
Rumi Chandra, Adv.
Mr. Anuj Rajput, Adv.
Mr. Jatendra Mohapatra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court that the Single Bench as well as the Division Bench are not Signature Not Verified justified in providing the continuity of service to the Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date: 2019.08.10 respondents inasmuch as their appointments were illegal. According 11:30:11 IST Reason:
to him, the respondents are not at all entitled to any benefit 2 inasmuch as there are many overwritings in the mark sheets. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on caveat controverts the aforementioned submissions by submitting that the overwriting and cutting in marks was due to some clerical mistake and no mala fides can be attached. According to him, the appointments were done in accordance with law inasmuch as under an advertisement, applications were invited and all the respondents were well qualified to the post on which they were appointed. Be that as it may, having gone through the material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the Single Bench as well as the Division Bench are justified in holding that the respondents' appointments were not illegal though there are certain irregularities.
Since the respondents are out of job from 1995 onw ards, in our considered opinion, interest of justice would be met if the respondents are not provided continuity of service as well as back wages from the date of the order of the Single Bench. Ordered accordingly. With this modification, the impugned judgments are upheld. The special leave petitions stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
(ASHWANI KUMAR) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)