D.S. Sinha, Mohan Lal Singhal, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Krishna Murari learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, and Shri Sudhir Agrawal learned counsel representing the respondents. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Oil and Natural Gas Commission and another v. Collector of Central Excise : (1992) Suppl. 2 SCC 432, and Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in the case of U.P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow v. Coal India Limited and others, 1994 (1) ARC at p. 430, the appropriate forum for redressal of the grievances raised herein, is not this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
(2.) THE petitioners may approach to the State of Uttar Pradesh for creation of appropriate forum, in the light of the two decisions noticed above, for adjudication of the controversy and redressal. Shri Ashok Mehta learned Chief Standing Counsel, is present and states that the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh would be authority competent to take requisite steps in the matter. Accordingly, the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh is directed to take requisite steps in the matter of creation of appropriate forum for adjudication of the controversy within two months from the date on which a copy of this order is served on him. A certified copy of this order may be given to learned counsel appearing for the parties within a week on payment of usual charges The learned Chief Standing Counsel shall also communicate to the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh this order.;