RAM PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the aforesaid writ petitions being connected with each other are almost similarly placed. The writ petitions are arising out of transfer of the employees from State of Uttar Pradesh to State of Uttaranchal after reorganization of the State of Uttar Pradesh. Admittedly, on 15th July, 2002 an order has been passed by the State of Uttar Pradesh giving certain modalities in what way the transfer will be given effect to. In many of the cases it has been stated by the petitioners that their respective objections have not been considered, but in many of the cases too we find that the requirement of passing a consequential order by the State is only given effect to.

(2.) According to us, since it is a matter of two States, as per Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 the Central Government is the final authority to pass an order in consultation with the State of Uttar Pradesh as well as State of Uttaranchal and the consequential effect of the order will be given by the State of Uttar Pradesh in case of transfer of employees from State of Uttar Pradesh to State of Uttaranchal. We clarify hereunder that definitely individual cases are to be scrutinized by the Union of India in consultation with the State as per the modalities given by the State of Uttar Pradesh in respect of such transfer. Union of India is party in many of the matters but in many of the matters Union of India has not been made party. However, since Union of India is the necessary party, we direct that in all the matters it will be treated as such.

(3.) In any event, before passing this order a question arose before this Bench that when a special leave petition filed before the Supreme Court has been admitted and the order of status quo has been passed on 22nd March, 2004 in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 24078-24085 of 2003 (Vinay Shankar Pandey and others v. State of U.P. and others), any order can be passed in the present case by this High Court or not. According to the learned Additional Advocate General of the State of Uttar Pradesh, neither of the matters pending before this Bench are pending before the Supreme Court but some other matters are pending and the main contesting petitioner therein was one Pushpak Jyoti, who became successful in obtaining an order from a Division Bench of this High Court which in Pushpak Jyoti v. State of U.P. and others, 2004 (55) ALR 28 and such petitioner has now withdrawn the special leave petition but remaining special leave petitions are awaiting for final disposal. However, after this situation now the things are clarified finally by the Supreme Court in the judgement in Indradeo Paswan v. Union of India and others, 2007 (7) SCC 250, wherein the question arose before the Supreme Court when one person opted for State of Jharkhand after bifurcation from Bihar though he was allocated to Bihar cadre on reorganization of Bihar State. The Court held that such type of allocations are found to be neither illegal nor unreasonable to apply the wednesbury principle. The Court further held that unless clear cases are made out, acceptance of individual grievances would make it a never ending process and that would not be in the interest of reorganised States or of the employees. Therefore, according to us, we have got the final picture clear from the Supreme Court in this respect and we do not find any necessity not to pass any final order in the writ petitions pending before us only on the basis of an interim order of status quo passed in some other matters, which are not pending here. Similarly placed another judgement has also been cited before us which in Purushottam Kumar Jha v. State of Jharkhand and others, 2006 (9) SCC 458. In any event, let us go back to the issue and decide the cases in the following manner: The cases in which objections are not considered, the same will be considered by the Union of India in consultation with the State/s under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000 within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order upon giving fullest opportunity of hearing and by passing a reasoned order in the individual cases. At the time of passing order, the authority concerned will give preferential value to the modalities already made known to the parties for the purpose. So far as consequential orders are concerned, since consideration by the Union of India in consultation with the State/s is already over, the consequential orders will be passed also within such period. However, the orders which will be passed finally in respect of any of the matters upon consideration of objection or communication of consequential orders will be finally binding upon the parties.