CIVIL APPEAL NO. 606 OF 2013
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(C.) NO.24459 OF 2012)
1.Leave granted.
2.These appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Contempt Nos. 1778/2012,JUDGMENT1779/2012 and 1785/2012 of 2012 dated24.07.2012.
3.The first appellant is the Managing Director, U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation (`Corporation’ for short) and the second appellant is In-Charge (Personnel) of the Corporation. They are aggrieved by certain directions issued by the High Court in the aforesaid Contempt Petition Nos.1778 of 2012, 1779 of 2012 and 1785 of 2012 dated 24.07.2012. The operative portion of the order passed by the High Court in the aforesaid Contempt Petition reads as under : “In view of the above, I direct the opposite party no.1 i.e. Managing Director, U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Limited, Kanpur to allow the petitioner to work as per the direction given in the contempt petition No.1239 of 2012 on 10.07.2012 within a period of ten days, failing which, he will have to appear in person to show cause as to why the contempt proceedings be not initiated against him.”
4.This Court, while entertaining these appeals, had issued notice to the respondents and further had stayed the order passed by the High Court in the Contempt Petitions.
5.We have heard Shri Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri Yatish Mohan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent(s).
6.Shri Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay appearing for the appellants would inform us that the Board had passed a resolution for increasing the age of its employees from 58 years to 60 years. The said resolution requires to be approved by the State Government; therefore, they had sent the resolution to the State Government for its approval. The State Government had passed an order approving the resolution of the Board only on 22.05.2012. In the said order it was made clear that it will become operative from the prospective date. In terms of the orders passed by the State Government, the Managing Director of the Corporation has also issued an Office Order dated 25.5.2012. The Office Order reads as under : “Office Order As per Govt. Order No.736/77-4-12-SIDC-33/12 dated 22.05.2012 issued under the signature of the Special Secretary, Industrial Development Department-4 and as per the arrangement given under Govt. order dated 20.09.2011 of Public Industry Department-1, the retirement age of Regular and Full Time employees working in UP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. is enhanced from 58 years to 60 years with immediate effect (from 22.05.2012 I.e. the date of issuance of Govt. order) and the sanction in regard to the same is given. Kindly take necessary urgent action as per above. Sd/-(Mohd.Ifekaruddin) Managing Director”
7.Since the respondents have retired from service beforethe approval of the Resolution by the State Government, in our view, the High Court ought not to have passed the impugned order(s) and direction(s). In that view of the matter, we allow these appeals and set aside the directions issued by the High Court.
8.However, we permit the respondents-herein to question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the State Government, if they so desire, within 15 days' time from today. If such petitions are filed by the respondents before the High Court within the time granted, we request the High Court to dispose of the petitions on merits without reference to the period of limitation.
9.All the other contentions raised by both the parties is left open. Ordered accordingly. (H.L. DATTU) (RANJAN GOGOI) JUDGMENTNEW DELHI; JANUARY 21, 2013. ITEM NO.67 COURT NO.7 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).24200/2012 (From the judgment and order dated 10.07.2012 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH IN CONTEMPT PETN.NO.1239 OF 2012) RAJIV KAPOOR & ANR. Petitioner(s) KARAN PAL SINGH Respondent(s) (With prayer for interim relief and office report ) WITH SLP(C) NO. 24459 of 2012 SLP(C) NO. 24461 of 2012 (With appln.(s) for permission to place addl.documents on record and with prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 25292 of 2012 (With appln.(s) for permission to place addl.documents on record and office report) Date: 21/01/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : JUDGMENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI For Petitioner(s) Mr.P.S.Patwalia, Sr.Adv. Mr. M.R. Shamshad,Adv. Mr.Shashank, Adv. Mr.Ajay Singh, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay For Respondent(s) Mr.Dinesh Dwivedi, Sr.Adv. Ms.Preetika Dwivedi, Adv. For Mr. Garvesh Kabra,Adv. Mr.Yatish Mohan, Adv. For Mr. E.C. Vidya Sagar UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following SLP(C)No.24459/2012, SLP(C)No.24461/2012 & SLP(C)No.25292/2012: Leave granted. Appeals are allowed, in terms of the signed order. SLP(C)No.24200/2012: Leave granted. Appeal allowed, in terms of the signed order. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Court Master (Two separate signed orders are placed on the file) JUDGMENT