Mukesh Kumar And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ

Heard Mr. I.P. Gairola, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent No.1, Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the second respondent and Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent and holding brief of Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 8, and, with their consent, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

The parties to these proceedings are in agreement that the order passed by the Public Services Tribunal, Dehradun on 31.07.2019 in Claim Petition No. 20/DB/2019, quashing the seniority list dated 20.12.2018, was without the petitioners herein being arrayed as respondents in the claim petition, and without their being given an opportunity of being heard. The names of the petitioners herein stand at Serial Nos. 4, 6 & 7 in the seniority list dated 20.12.2018. However even in their absence, and without their being arrayed as respondents in the claim petition, the Public Services Tribunal quashed the seniority list dated 20.12.2018 in its entirety, thereby affecting the rights of the petitioners also, without affording them a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

While the writ petition is required to be allowed, and the order passed by the Public Services Tribunal set aside on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties, Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 to 8, would submit that matter be remanded to the Public Services Tribunal, and respondent Nos. 3 to 8 herein be permitted to file an application to implead the petitioners herein, and others referred to in the said seniority list dated 20.12.2018, as respondents in the claim petition; and the Public Services Tribunal be directed to decide the claim petition within a specified time framed.

In the light of the submissions made by Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 8, suffice it to set aside the order passed by the Public Services Tribunal dated 31.07.2019, and restore the claim petition to file. Respondent Nos.3 to 8 - claim petitioners shall file an application to implead all those, whose names figure in the said seniority list dated 20.12.2018, as respondents in the claim petition, within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The Tribunal shall, after issuing notices to the respondents and after giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, decide the claim petition with utmost expedition preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

While Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 to 8, would request this Court to pass an interim order, in the interregnum, directing the second respondent not to effect promotions, it would be wholly inappropriate for this Court to pass any such order, since the writ petition is being allowed on the short ground of non-joinder of necessary parties. Suffice it to make it clear that the order now passed by us shall not disable the petitioner from seeking interim relief before the Public Services Tribunal.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.