Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mahesh Chand vs Union Of India on 16 October, 2014
Bench: Dipak Misra, Uday Umesh Lalit
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 844 OF 2013
MAHESH CHAND .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .. RESPONDENTS
ORDER
The basic grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that though he could have been appointed to the Indian Administrative Service cadre of Uttar Pradesh in respect of the year 2006, yet the same did not happen because of belated holding of the selection process by the competent authorities.
At the very outset, for the sake of clarity, we are obliged to state that an interlocutory application was filed in the case of U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. V. Rajesh Kumar & Ors. (2012) Signature Not Verified 7 SCC 1 in the backdrop that an order of stay was operating Digitally signed by Naveen Kumar Date: 2014.10.17 15:25:06 IST Reason: in the said case. As the said appeal has already been disposed of, this Court directed the I.A. to be converted to a 2 writ petition as the grievance was genuine.
We are not required to state the facts in detail. Suffice it to state that the name of the petitioner finds mention in the Select List meant for 2006 published on 27.11.2012, but he could not be extended the benefit as he stood superannuated by that time. A similar matter had travelled to this Court in Union of India and Anr. V. Hemraj Singh Chauhan & Ors. (2010) 4 SCC 290 wherein a view was expressed in favour of the respondents after repelling the contentions raised by the Union of India.
In pursuance of the aforesaid judgment, the Government of India vide order dated 25.5.2011 has passed an elaborate order after referring to a passage from the said decision. The order issuing the direction which is essential for the adjudication of of the present case reads as follows:
“Now therefore, in pursuance of directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 23.3.2010 in Civil Appeal No. 2651-52 of 2010 (arising out of SLP No. 6758-6759/2009) Shri Ram Naval Singh (DOB 2.1.1950) will be deemed to have been appointed to IAS Cadre of UP with all consequential benefits on the basis of inclusion of his name in the select list of 2004 not later than his immediate junior viz Shri Ram Mohan Yadav appointed to IAS on the basis of 3 the same select list of 2004 i.e. 9.12.2010.” Ms. Tamta, learned counsel appearing for Union of India is not in a position to dispute the same and, therefore, we direct that the present petitioner shall be deemed to have been appointed to Indian Administrative Service, cadre of Uttar Pradesh with all consequential benefits on the basis of inclusion of his name in the Select List of 2006, not later than to his immediate junior, namely, Mr. Vinay Priya Dubey, who has been appointed to IAS Cadre on the basis of the same select list of 2006. It is hereby made clear that date of appointment of Mr. Vinay Priya Dubey shall be the governing factor for grant of extension of benefit to the petitioner. The benefits be extended within a period of three months hence.
At this juncture, we may note that I.A. No. 1/2013 has been filed by one Mr. Krishna Kant Shukla for impleadment on the ground that he is senior to the present petitioner and similarly placed. If that is so, the Union of India shall be well advised to extend the benefit to Krishna Kant Shukla on same parameters so that the Central Government can set an example how a litigation can be avoided. 4
The writ petition and the IA No. 1/2013 stands disposed of on above terms. There shall be no order as to cost.
....................J. (DIPAK MISRA) …...…......................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT) NEW DELHI OCTOBER 16, 2014 5 ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.7 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 844/2013 MAHESH CHAND Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln. For impleadment and office report) Date : 16/10/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sanchit Garga, Adv.
Mr. Harsh Vardhan Surana, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, Adv.
Ms. Mridula Ray Bharadwaj, Adv.
Mr. K.K. Shukla, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The writ petition and IA No. 1/2013 stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(NAVEEN KUMAR) (RENUKA SADANA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)