AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ajay Rastogi, J.—These cognate cases involving common controversy, at joint request, have been finally heard at admission stage.
It has not been controverted that appeals preferred by respective applicants (Petitioners herein) are pending adjudication before Service Appellate Tribunal and the controversy raised at the bar are yet to be examined on merits.
These petitions have been filed only with a limited grievance that a number of appeals were preferred by applicants working as Constable (MT) and the Respondents took decision depriving them of emoluments admissible to constables working in the technical wing-against which appeals were preferred before the Tribunal. But what has been alleged by Petitioners is that in some of appeals interim orders were passed by learned Tribunal pursuant thereto, emoluments are being made available to respective applicants and they were allowed to continue as Constable (MT); However when appeals preferred by present Petitioners came up for consideration, their prayer for interim relief was rejected by learned Tribunal which has caused prejudice to them; as such have approached this Court by way of instant petitions.
This Court while passing interim order dt.22/12/2010 in CWP-14180/2010 directed the Respondents to maintain status quo and allow the Petitioners to work as Constable (MT) held prior to the order assailed in appeal before the Tribunal till further orders.
Counsel for Petitioners submits that in some of appeals pending before the Tribunal, interim order is still operative and since the issue raised at the bar is yet to be examined on merits and the writ petitions in terms of interim order (supra) may be disposed of with the liberty to the Tribunal to decide their appeals on merits.
Government Counsel on the other hand submits that learned Tribunal after examining facts of individual appeal granted interim relief but he has not been able to controvert that all the appeals preferred before the Tribunal including that of present writ Petitioners are based on same set of facts and if in few appeals interim relief was granted by the Tribunal, there was no justification nor reasons are coming forward from the orders as to why the parity was not maintained by learned Tribunal in case of present Petitioners who were denied of same interim relief.
Consequently, these writ petitions are disposed of with the direction that the Respondents shall maintain status quo and allow the Petitioners to continue on the post of Constable (MT) which they are holding prior to the order impugned and assailed in the appeal pending before the learned Tribunal.
However, it is made clear that present order will be subject to final outcome of the appeals pending before the Tribunal, which will decide the appeals expeditiously without being influenced by observations expressed (supra) by this Court. No costs.