Allahabad High Court
Prahalad Kumar Alias Prahlad Kumar ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... on 25 August, 2023
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:57038 Court No. - 20 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5128 of 2023 Petitioner :- Prahalad Kumar Alias Prahlad Kumar Maurya And 35 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, U.P. Lucknow And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Rahul Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard Mr. Rahul Singh learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.
2. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties today is taken on record.
3. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 4th January 2023 and notice dated 5th January, 2023 whereby petitioners' names have been directed to be deleted from the deta portal of the department with the net result that petitioners prior to passing of impugned orders were working on the post of volunteers in Prantiya Rakshak Dal stand terminated. Also under challenge is the order dated 5th January, 2023 whereby a notice/warning has been issued that in case any of the 290 terminated persons approach the authorities concerned regarding their termination, first information report against them would be filed.
4. On 19th July, 2023 following order had been passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 5.
Under challenge are the termination order dated 04.01.2023 and notice dated 05.01.2023, copies of which are annexures 1 and 2 to the petition.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that all the petitioners were working as Rakshak in Prantiya Rakshak Dal since last several decades. He contends that through the order impugned the services of the petitioners have been terminated. Specific averment has been made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition that no opportunity of hearing has been given to the petitioners prior to termination of their services. In this regard reliance has been placed upon the judgement of this Court passed in Writ A No. 4155 of 2023 in re: Jawahar and others vs State of U.P. and others, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the petition, whereby in similar circumstances orders impugned have been quashed. Thus, it is prayed that the petitioners be given the benefit of the order passed in the case of Jawahar (supra).
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions sent by the respondent no. 3 i.e. the Deputy Director, Youth Welfare and Prantiya Rakshak Dal, U.P., Lucknow dated 18.07.2023 states that notices had been issued to all the petitioners calling upon them to produce the documents in their possession which the petitioners failed to avail, consequently as their appointment itself is not found to be valid, their services have been dismissed. It is thus contended that the petitioners are not entitled for the benefit of judgement and order this Court in the case of Jawahar (supra) wherein it has been admitted by the State that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners before passing of the impugned order.
However considering that specific averment has been made in paragraph 12 of the petition that no opportunity of hearing has been given to the petitioners prior to passing of the order impugned vis a vis the instructions as have been made available to the learned Standing Counsel, the Court finds it appropriate that the complete records be produced pertaining to issuance of the notice to the petitioners on the next date fixed.
List this case on 02.08.2023 as fresh."
5. Whereafter on 10th August, 2023 following order had been passed:-
"In pursuance of directions issued earlier, records have been produced by learned State Counsel.
It has been submitted that information for affording personal appearance to petitioners prior to passing of termination order was required to be given by the Block Development Officer. However in the present records, there does not appear to be any communication between the Block Development Officer and petitioners regarding fixing of any date or time for presence of petitioners for the purposes of affording any opportunity of hearing.
Learned State counsel is therefore granted 10 days' time to file short affidavit bringing on record documents to substantiate that petitioners were ever intimated regarding any date time or place and authority before whom they were directed to appear for being afforded opportunity of hearing.
List this case on 22.08.2023 at 02.15 P.M. "
6. In pursuance of aforesaid, counter affidavit has been filed today in which in paragraph 12 thereof it has been indicated that the district magistrate had constituted a committee vide order dated 9th November, 2022 which submitted its report dated 3rd December, 2022 whereafter 347 such volunteers were required to be present before the committee and in fact were present whereafter the impugned order have been passed. However the counter affidavit does not indicate any personal notices having been effected upon the petitioners.
7. Learned counsel for petitioners has in fact adverted to paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit to submit that the opposite parties themselves have stated that in pursuance of formation of committee, all the concerned volunteers were informed by public notice to appear before the committee. On the basis of instructions, learned counsel for petitioners denies any personal notice having ever been served upon petitioners.
8. Upon consideration of aforesaid submissions and material on record, it is evident that no personal notice was ever issued to the petitioners prior to passing of the impugned orders. The impugned order itself does not indicate any personal notice having ever been served upon any of the petitioners. Although the impugned order indicates that an opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners but even if assuming the aforesaid to be correct, there does not appear to be any deliberation or consideration of submissions of the petitioners even if they had appeared before the said committee.
9. In view of aforesaid, it is quite evident that impugned orders have been passed without being served with any personal notice or being provided any opportunity of hearing or even consideration of their stand.
10. The aspect that even post decisional hearing has not been granted to petitioner is also evident from the notice dated 5th January, 2023 whereby the opposite parties in fact have issued a warning to the 290 volunteers whose name have been deleted not to approach any of the authorities concerned failing which first information reports under Section 186 and 353 IPC have been directed to be lodged.
11. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances that impugned order dated 4th January, 2023 has been passed without consideration/ stand of the petitioners, same is quashed by issuance a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to opposite parties to pass order afresh after serving them with notice to appear before the committee on a date, time and place which has been fixed and indicated in the notice itself. Fresh orders shall be passed after considering the stand of petitioners. The entire exercise is to be completed by opposite parties within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the concerned authority.
12. Service benefits to petitioners shall abide by the final decision taken. The impugned notice dated 5th January, 2023 being against all norms is also quashed by issuance a writ in the nature of Certiorari.
13. Since admittedly petitioners have been performing their duties for the past 20 years without apparently any complaint against them and also keeping in view directions passed by this Court in similar matters in writ A No. 4155 of 2023 (Jawahar and 26 others versus State of U.P. and others), it is directed that till conclusion of aforesaid inquiry, petitioners shall be allowed to work as volunteers in P.R.D. and paid their honorarium.
14. Resultantly the petition succeeds and is allowed. Parties to bear their own cost.
Order Date :- 25.8.2023 prabhat