Vineet Kumar Singh Raghuvanshi and 10 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18470 of 2023 Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Singh Raghuvanshi And 10 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Yadav,Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶2Petitioners claim that benefit of the judgment of this Court in the case of Surabhi Anand and Others vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Ayush Lko. And Ors., Writ A No.23355 of 2021 which is claimed to be affirmed by the Supreme Court.

¶3It is admitted position that petitioners who were working as paramedical staff in the Homeopathic Medical Services of the State Government have been reinstated in the light of the law laid down by this Court affirmed by the Supreme Court. However, the claim that since they were not party in the writ petition a sword seems to be hanging over and above them.

¶4Learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that there is no pleading in the writ petition that there was any action taken by the authorities questioning the continuance of the petitioner in service and then he approached this Court merely on the basis of apprehension.

¶5Having heard learned counsel for the parties this Court finds that on a mere apprehension. No writ petition can be entertained, nor any direction can be issued because there is nothing which can be shown to be an obligation of the respondents towards the petitioner which has not been discharged.

¶6At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition as premature one.

¶7Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn at this stage. Order Date :- 3.11.2023 Deepika High Court of Judicature at Allahabad