Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of U.P vs Sukhbir Agro Energy Ltd on 17 February, 2015
Bench: Dipak Misra, Adarsh Kumar Goel
SLP(C) 5300/15
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2023 OF 2015
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.5300 of 2015)
State of U.P. and Others Appellant(s)
Versus
Sukhbir Agro Energy Ltd. and Another Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2024 OF 2015
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.5301 of 2015)
O R D E R
Heard Ms. Reena Singh, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P., Mr. Adish Aggarwal, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. Dhruv Agarwal, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.2.
Leave granted.
On a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the High Court after noting the submissions, has passed the following order:
“In view of above, it shall be appropriate that the government should be given liberty to proceed in accordance with law and take a fresh decision through the duly constituted Cabinet Committee. It shall further be appropriate that the judgement of this Court in the case of Jai Prakash Associates (supra) and other judgements relief upon by the petitioners' counsel along with the pleading Signature Not Verified on record in this bunch of writ petition as Digitally signed by Chetan Kumar well as the new industrial policy of 2012 of Date: 2015.02.20 15:29:21 IST Reason: the State Govt. be communicated by the learned Addl. Advocate General and place before the Sub Committee of the government which may look into the matter while taking final decision with regard to present SLP(C) 5300/15 2 controversy.
Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petitions finally directing the respondents not to make any recovery in pursuance to the impugned Government Order dated 18.11.2011 till the controversy is adjudicated by the Sub Committee of the Ministers of the State. Keeping in view the decision taken by the Sub Committee, government shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law, expeditiously and shall communicate the same to the petitioners and other alike persons. Till a decision is taken by the Committee (supra) and consequential order is passed and communicated, the order passed by the respondents in pursuance to the impugned order shall be kept under suspension and no recovery shall be made from the petitioners and no action shall be taken in pursuance to the impugned government order.” In our considered opinion, the High Court has really left it to the State Government to take a decision through a Committee. Needless to emphasize, the Committee can take a decision in accordance with law. If the respondents are grieved by the decision of the Committee, they can challenge the said decision before the appropriate forum, as advised in law.
With the aforesaid clarifications, the appeals are disposed of.
......................J. (Dipak Misra) ......................J. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) New Delhi;
February 17, 2015.
SLP(C) 5300/15
3
ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.6 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.5300/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12/08/2013 in WP No. 1715/2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE OF U.P & ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUKHBIR AGRO ENERGY LTD AND ANR. Respondent(s) (With office report) WITH S.L.P.(C) No.5301/2015 (With office report) Date: 17/02/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL For Petitioner(s) Ms. Reena Singh, AAG Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv. Ms. Alka Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Adish Aggarwal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Nishant Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Dhruv Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Nishit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Vipin Kr. Jai, AOR Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neelam Sharma, Adv. SLP(C) 5300/15 4 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)