Ram Sanehi Gupta vs State of U.P. and Others

The contention of the Petitioner is that the latter point of the aperatine order of the Tribunal dated 30-5-1980 could not be executed through the District Court. Section 5(7) of the U.P. Public Service Tribunals Act clearly lays down that the order of the Tribunal shall on certificate being issued by the Tribunal be executed by the District Counsel in the same manner and by the same procedure as if it were a decree for like relief made by itself in a suit. Relief in question was to the effect that the State Government was directed to consider the Petitioner''s claim for confirmation and promotion on certain assumptions within a period of six months from the date of the order of Tribunal. The relief was clearly in the nature of a mandatory injunction and as such was executable in the manner provided in Order XXI Rule 32 Code of Civil Procedure. The struck off the execution case in part satisfaction and its attention does not seem to have been invited to the procedure under Order XXI Rule 32 Code of Civil Procedure. The Petitioner may therefore, approach the District Court again praying for execution of the rest of the order passed by the Tribunal. As such we decline to entertain the petition.

It is accordingly dismissed. As regards Relief (C), it will be open to the Petitioner to take such fresh action as may be advised after having approached the execution Court.