Suresh Prasad Tripathi vs State of U.P. and Others

Sudhir Agarwal, J.—List revised. None appeared for the Petitioner. Sri S.S. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent-Union of India is present. I have perused the record.

The writ petition is directed against the order allocating the Petitioner to the State of Uttaranchal finally in exercise of its power under U.P. Re-organization Act, 2000.

I find that after considering the matter involving validity of cadre allocation orders of Government of India in detail, this Court (Hon''ble Sunil Ambwani, J) passed a detailed order on 30.5.2009 and dismissed all the writ petitions led by Sanjay Kumar Singh and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. in Writ Petition No. 4624 of 2009 decided on 30.7.2009 along with other connected matters as well as Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors. in Writ Petition No. 13652 of 2009 decided on 30.7.2009. The Special Appeal filed against Sanjay Kumar Singh''s judgment was admitted by a Division Bench of this Court on 08.09.2009, but the interim order was refused, where against Special Leave to Appeal was filed in the Apex Court wherein order of status-quo was passed. But later on against the said judgment dated 30.7.2009 another Special Appeal came up for consideration before a Division Bench and was decided finally on 9.10.2009, which order confirm the judgment of Single judge passed in the case of Sanjay Kumar Singh (supra). The Special Appeal was dismissed on 9.10.2009.

Following these two judgments, this Court (myself) decided another Writ Petition No. 52014 of 2009 Pradeep Kumar Singh v. Union of India and Ors. on 28.10.2009, wherein some other arguments were also considered and negated. All the grounds taken in this writ petition are covered by the aforesaid decision in Sanjay Kumar Singh (supra), Mahendra Kumar Singh (supra) and Pradeep Kumar Singh (supra).

The Apex Court has also considered the matter and held that in the matter of cadre allocation individual grievances may not be given much weight and the Court should not interfere considering individual cases see Indradeo Paswan Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others,

The grounds taken in the present writ petition are all covered by the aforesaid decisions and therefore this writ petition also deserve to be dismissed for the reasons stated in the aforesaid decisions. In the result the writ petition lacks merit. Dismissed. No order as to costs.