WPSB/210/2015 of Shailendra Singh Bisht Vs Chief Secretary AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALWrit Petiton (S/B) No. 210 of 2015

Shailendra Singh Bisht

...Petitioner

Chief Secretary & others

...Respondents

Present: Mr. Vijay Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.C. Pandey, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos .1 to 3.

Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 6.

Dated: 11[th] December, 2018

Coram: Hon’ble Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.Hon’ble Lok Pal Singh, J.

Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. (Oral)

The petitioner and the unofficial respondents are all persons holding posts under the State of Uttarakhand. They have directly invoked the jurisdiction of this Court without approaching the U.P. Public Services Tribunal.

2. While the petitioner is, no doubt, not obligated to approach the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal in the first instance, as has been held by us in our order in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 413 of 2016 dated 15.11.2018, the fact remains that the jurisdiction which this Court exercises, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is discretionary; and it is not as if this Court would entertain every writ petition filed by persons aggrieved by the action of the Government with regards their terms and conditions of service, for it is not in dispute that the Tribunal also has no jurisdiction to entertain such matters.

3. While, ordinarily, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal should be invoked in such matters, this Court can always entertain writ petition, on its jurisdiction being invoked

directly, in exceptional cases. As the disputes raised in the present writ petition can be effectively adjudicated by the Tribunal, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition, and therefore relegate the petitioner to avail his effective statutory remedy of approaching the Tribunal constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.

4. Leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal, the writ petition is dismissed.

5. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court on 02.06.2015, and since they are now being relegated to avail the remedy of filing their claim petition before the Public Services Tribunal, we request the Tribunal to consider condoning the delay, if any, for the period during which the writ petition was pending on the file of this Court.

6. Let copy of this order be furnished within two days.

(Lok Pal Singh, J.) 11.12.2018 A.kaur

(Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.) 11.12.2018