Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Court No. - 8

¶1Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4170 of 2022 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh,Nagendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4366 of 2022 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh,Prasoon Kumar Anjor Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4382 of 2022 Petitioner :- Kamta Prasad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Up Govt. Lko. and 5 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prasoon Kumar Anjor,Awadhesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4643 of 2022 Petitioner :- Kashi Ram Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 5 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4695 of 2022 Petitioner :- Jai Narayan Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4779 of 2022 Petitioner :- Shiv Narayan Respondent :- State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 5 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Rawat,Awadhesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4948 of 2022 Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and 5 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶8Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7045 of 2022 Petitioner :- Shanti Prasad Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 4 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Gaurav Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶9Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7068 of 2022 Petitioner :- Amar Nath Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home Lko. and 4 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Gaurav Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶10Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7080 of 2022 Petitioner :- Anjani Kumar Ojha Respondent :- State Of Up Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secretariat Lko and 4 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Gaurav Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶1Heard S/Sri Awadhesh Kumr Singh, Nagendra Pratap Singh and Ram Kewal Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Tushar Verma, learned Standing Counsel.

¶2This bunch of writ petitions have been filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 4.2.2022 passed by the Director General Provincial Guard Team/Development Team and Youth Welfare, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow with further prayer for a Writ of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to provide the duty to the petitioners on the post of Prantiya Rakshak Dal and pay them honorarium as is being paid to the other similarly situated Prantiya Rakshak Dal.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the case of similarly situated persons, this Court has passed the order dated

7.10.2021 in Service Single No.12261 of 2021, Kapil Dev Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. and others. Against the said judgement and order dated 7.10.2021, the State filed Special Appeal No.131 of 2022, which was dismissed vide order dated

5.4.2022.

¶4Sri Tushar Verma, learned Standing Counsel fairly submits that the controversy involved in this bunch of writ petitions is squarely covered by the judgement and order dated 7.10.2021 passed by this Court in Service Single No.12261 of 2021 (supra).

¶5For the sake of convenience, the operation portion of the judgement and order dated 7.10.2021 passed by this Court in Service Single No.12261 of 2021 (supra) is reproduced as under:- "Considering the fact that the petitioner has rendered 9 years of long services with Prantiya Rakshak Dal and his work and conduct was not found unsatisfactory at any point of time and no complain whatsoever, was received against him, at this stage, dispensing with his service, would be inequitable. Even, if the petitioner has not been able to produce his training certificate, since he has rendered 9 years long services with the department, it would be appropriate to direct the respondents to give the duty to the petitioner if there is work and pay him honorarium as is being paid to the other members of Prantiya Rakshak Dal. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is finally disposed of."

¶6In view thereof, these writ petitions are also disposed of in terms of the judgement and order dated 7.10.2021 passed in Service Single No.12261 of 2021 (supra). Order Date :- 4.7.2023 Rao/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench