Disposed¶13

Parmal Singh and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Legislative Section 1 Legislative Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2024WRIA/12447/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Parallel/simultaneous proceedings on same subject matter before Supreme Court and High Court; binding effect of apex court decision on coordinate litigation; vires of U.P. Act No.1 of 2021 (previously an Ordinance); Article 32 writ petition W.P.(C) No.1458/2020 pending, next date 14.01.2025; disposal of writ petition with continuation of existing protection mutatis mutandis; parties left open to hearing before apex court; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; WRIT - A; decided 19.12.2024; coram Attau Rahman Masoodi and Subhash Vidyarthi, JJ.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of the writ petition with the protection already granted to the petitioners continuing to apply mutatis mutandis; parties left open to participate in the hearing before the apex court if so advised. ¶13

Parmal Singh and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court may proceed with the writ petitions when the same subject matter (validity of U.P. Act No.1 of 2021) is pending before the Hon'ble apex court, or discharge the proceedings under some protection to the petitioners.

¶12

Court's answer

Simultaneous proceedings before this Court and the Hon'ble apex court on one and the same subject cannot proceed, and this Court is bound by the decision of the Hon'ble apex court on the same issue.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The consequences of the pending apex-court proceedings are determinate: if the vires of the impugned Act is upheld, all the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed; if the result is otherwise, the writ petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of the judgment and the State shall obey the verdict in favour of the petitioners to the extent applicable.

¶12

Key takeaways

The present writ petition is disposed of accordingly, the protection already granted continuing to apply mutatis mutandis, and the parties are left open to avail the opportunity of hearing before the apex court if so advised.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - A No. 12447 of 2024 (Parmal Singh And Ors. v. State of U.P.), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, decided 19.12.2024 (A.R. Masoodi and Subhash Vidyarthi, JJ.). The writ petitions concern the validity of U.P. Act No.1 of 2021, earlier brought in through an Ordinance and challenged before the Hon'ble apex court under Article 32 of the Constitution in Writ Petition (Civil) No.1458/2020, next fixed on 14.01.2025. Holding that simultaneous proceedings before this Court and the apex court on one and the same subject cannot proceed, and that this Court is bound by the apex court's decision on the same issue, the Court disposed of the writ petition: if the vires of the Act is upheld the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed; if otherwise, the petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of that judgment and the State shall obey the verdict to the extent applicable. The protection already granted to the petitioners continues mutatis mutandis, and the parties remain free to avail the hearing before the apex court.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:85383-DB

¶2

Court No. - 1

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12447 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Parmal Singh And Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Legislative Section 1 Legislative Deptt. Lko And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Nimish Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Nimish Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents.

¶7

At the outset, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents has placed a copy of the order dated 29.08.2023 passed by the Hon'ble apex court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.1458/2020 which reads as under:

¶8

"1. An adjournment letter has been moved by learned counsel for the respondents on account of non-availability of the learned Attorney General, who is engaged before the Constitution Bench.

¶9

2. List on 03rd October, 2023."

¶10

It is not in dispute that the subject matter of the present writ petitions and the matter before the Hon'ble apex court fixed on 14.01.2025 is one and the same i.e. the validity of U.P. Act No.1 of 2021 which was previously brought in through an Ordinance giving rise to the writ petition before the apex court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

¶11

Simultaneous proceedings before this Court and Hon'ble apex court on one and the same subject can not proceed for the reason that the time frame within which the courts of law function is a public property and its use can't be allowed to achieve futile results. We have no manner of doubt that this Court is bound by the decision of Hon'ble the apex court on the same issue.

¶12

The question that arises is whether the Court may proceed or discharge the proceedings under some protection to the petitioners. It is to be noted that the consequences which are to fall as a result of pending proceedings before the apex court are clear. The vires of the Act shall either be upheld or turned down. In case the vires of the impugned Act is upheld, all the writ petitions in that event are liable to be dismissed and on the result of proceedings being otherwise, the writ petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of the judgment accordingly and the State shall obey the verdict in favour of the petitioners to the extent applicable.

¶13

Having clarified the position as above, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition accordingly and the protection so granted shall mutatis mutandi apply. We equally leave it open to the parties to avail the opportunity of hearing before the apex court, if so advised.

¶14

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (A.R. Masoodi, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Ram.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Parmal Singh and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Legislative Section 1 Legislative Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmal Singh and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Legislative Section 1 Legislative Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Irigation Deptt.Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Others Vs Jagdamba Prasad Yadav and Another

M/S Al-Haq Foods Pvt. Ltd. Thru Its Director Navin Kumar Bhambri vs State of U.P. Thru Addl. Chief/Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Environment Forests and Climate Change and Ors.

Dileep Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin./Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Energy U.P. Govt. Lko. and Others

Suresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Lok Nirman Vibhag Lko. and 5 Others

Mahesh Kumar Saxena and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Minor Irrigation Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Sita Ram and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Legislative Section 1 Legislative Deptt. Lko and Ors.