- (1.) Petitioner before this Court is admittedly the wife of an employee of the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation. She is aggrieved by the circular issued by the U.P.S.R.T.C. Heard Quarters, Lucknow dated 13th May, 2011 specifically the conditions 1 and 2 of the said letter which reads as follows: According to the petitioner conditions so incorporated in the general circular and virtually revived the contract, which has been entered into between the corporation and the petitioner in the year 2008, term of said contract has yet not expired. He submits that the novation of the contract cannot be done unilaterally. For the purpose, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi Development Authority v. General Action Committee of SFS Flats, 2008 AIR(SC) 1343. He also refers to interim order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 30.5.2011 passed in writ petition No. 32508 of 2011 wherein in respect of petitioner of the said petition an interim order has been granted.
(2.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having gone through the records of the writ petition, we find that there has been no novation of the contract entered into between the petitioner and the corporation under the circular dated 13.5.2011. The contention in that regard is based on misreading of the conditions referred to above. The circular has provided for permission being obtained in respect of the running of the contracts which has been obtained by the family members of the employees of the corporation working in the same region for which the contract has been obtained. The circular itself provides that either the employee is to be shifted or the route of the contracted vehicles has to be changed.
(3.) We are of the considered opinion that the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court is a clearly distinguishable in the facts of the present case.;