Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P.Through Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... vs Satish Chandra Sharma on 6 September, 2019
Author: Ajai Lamba
Bench: Ajai Lamba, Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 2 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 530 of 2011 Appellant :- State Of U.P.Through Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home 4469(S/S)09 Respondent :- Satish Chandra Sharma Counsel for Appellant :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Sudhir Kumar Misra Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
(C.M. Application No.72002 of 2011).
1. The application seeks condonation of delay in filing the special appeal.
2. For reasons given in the affidavit in support of the application, the application is allowed.
3. Delay in filing the special appeal is hereby condoned.
Order Date :- 6.9.2019 nishant/-
Court No. - 2Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 530 of 2011 Appellant :- State Of U.P.Through Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home 4469(S/S)09 Respondent :- Satish Chandra Sharma Counsel for Appellant :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Sudhir Kumar Misra Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
(Authored by Manish Mathur, J.)
1. State of U.P., through Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Lucknow and three other State functionaries have preferred this special appeal challenging order dated 17.05.2011 rendered in Writ Petition No.4469 (SS) of 2009 titled 'Satish Chandra Sharma vs. State of U.P. and others'.
By means of the impugned order, the application for vacation of interim order filed by the appellants/writ respondents has been rejected and the interim order dated 29.07.2009 has been made absolute.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner has not appeared.
The appeal relates to the year 2011. 8 years have gone by. We find no justifiable reason to adjourn the case to await appearance of the counsel. In such circumstances, we have heard Shri Rajeev Ratna Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellants/State and have considered the issue.
3. A perusal of the pleadings indicate that by means of interim order dated 29.07.2009 rendered Writ Petition No.4469 (SS) of 2009 (supra), the operation and implementation of order dated 16.07.2009 was stayed on the ground that the transfer of the petitioner has been effected as a measure of reversion.
Order dated 29.07.2009 reads as under:-
?Connect this petition with writ petition Nos. 5595 (SS) of 2006 and 4309 (SS) of 2009.
Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties No. 1 to 4.
It has been stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been transferred from Police Lines, Shahjahanpur to P.A.C. vide order dated 16.7.2009. In the impugned order, it has been mentioned that the petitioner was reverted from the post of Reserve Inspector Police Lines to 47th Battalion PAC.
Being aggrieved by the said action, he has preferred the instant writ petition inter alia on the ground that the post of Company Commander is not equivalent to the Reserve Inspector and if he has to be transferred to P.A.C. then he can only be transferred on the equivalent post having same status and not on the post of Company Commander. In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the interim order dated 11.7.2006 passed in writ petition Nos. 5595 (SS) of 2006.
Prima facie, a case for interim relief is made out.
Admit.
Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is allowed eight weeks' time to file counter affidavit and the petitioner will have six weeks to file rejoinder affidavit.
Till the next date of listing, the operation and implementation of the impugned order dated 16.7.2009 shall remain stayed. However, it will be open for the State to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, if they so desire.?
4. The appellants/writ respondents had thereafter filed application for vacation of the interim order which has been rejected as indicated hereinabove.
5. It has been brought to the notice of the Court that writ proceedings are still pending and the order impugned in this appeal is merely an interlocutory one.
6. In view of the above, we deem it just and proper to dispose of the appeal granting liberty to the appellants/writ respondents to file an appropriate application for early hearing of the writ petition.
Ordered accordingly.
7. Paper-book of the writ petition attached to this appeal is de-linked and shall be placed before the appropriate Court.
Order Date :- 6.9.2019 nishant/-