VIJAY SHANKAR SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a bunch of seventy seven writ petitions. The binding thread running through all these writ petitions, is the subject matter of repatriation of the petitioners from the borrowing department/ Agency. All the petitioners are at present working in the State Urban Development Agency (hereinafter called as 'SUDA'). Orders have been passed by SUDA directing the petitioners to return to their parent department. In one form or the other, all the petitioners have challenged the orders of their repatriation from SUDA. Before venturing into the merits of the case and the claim of the petitioners, it will be necessary to know what SUDA actually stands for.

(2.) IT has been informed that SUDA is an agency/ autonomous body, registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960. It has temporary establishment in the State till the scheme lasts. SUDA is being run with the temporary grant, sanction of which are given on year to year basis from the Government of U.P. The administrative expenditure is meted out from the grant by the Government of India/ State Government for the schemes related to the upliftment of the weaker section of urban areas. SUDA has no permanent establishment, it is an autonomous body and the powers vest in the governing body of the Society, and dependent upon the financial sanction by the State, Government. Temporary staff on deputation basis or on contract basis, are being deputed in SUDA.

(3.) THE petitioners have come to SUDA from various Departments/ Corporation/ Govt. Companies and other instrumentalities of the State. The petitioners, who are working in SUDA can be classified in various categories but for purposes of these petitions, they can be classified mainly in two groups. The first category consists of such employees, whose parent department are still existing and functioning; the second category consists of those employees, whose parent department have either become sick or are not existing today.