SIBGHAT ULLAH KHAN,J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing
(2.) COUNSEL for the State respondent. Petitioner's services were terminated in the year 1992. At that time petitioner was posted at Nainital. He filed appeal which was allowed by District Inspector General of Police, Kumaun Range, Nainital on 28.03.1995. Termination order was set aside and substituted by an other punishment. However, the deceased Ram Autar Sharma did not join pursuant to the order passed in his appeal, in stead, he filed a case before U.P. State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow. With effect from 01.11.2000 State of U.P. stood bifurcated and Nainital became part of the newly created State Uttaranchal/ Uttarakhand. Sri Ram Autar Sharma died on 07.05.2006. The present petitioners are widow and sons of Ram Autar, who filed impleadment application before the Tribunal which was allowed through order dated 19.12.2006. The Tribunal held that the case was maintainable in State of U.P. Ultimately claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal by order dated 16.07.2010 and the order dated 28.03.1995 was upheld. However, in the end it was observed as follows:- "However, it would be open to the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner to move before the appropriate authority for due benefits, if any, admissible under rules or to seeks other appropriate remedy if permissible in law." Thereafter, petitioners filed application before Police Authority of Nainital. The said authority sent the matter to the U.P. Police Authorities. The U.P. Police Authorities have once again remitted the matter back to Uttarakhand authorities through communication dated 11.07.2011 written on behalf of D.I.G. Police Establishment, U.P. to Senior Superintendent of Police, District Nainital, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition. There is another similar order of D.I.G. Headquarter Establishment U.P.P.H.Q., Allahabad dated 13.12.2011 which is Annexure 10 to the writ petition. In my opinion, as services of deceased Ram Autar Sharma were terminated in Nainital and he also filed appeal at Nainital hence whatever relief is permissible may be granted to the petitioner by Uttarakhand authorities.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY, in my opinion, writ petition may be filed before Uttarakhand High Court for the relief for which petitioners may be entitled, independently of the last para of the order of Tribunal dated 16.07.2010 (supra). With the above observation this writ petition is dismissed only on the ground of its non-maintainability in this High Court without expressing any opinion on merit.;