Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 79622 (ALL)

UMA SHANKAR YADAV v. SECRETARY KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI AND 3 OTHERS

SPLA/760/2025 · 2025-08-12

Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138044-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 525 of 2025 Appellant :- Uma Shankar Yadav Respondent :- Secretary Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti and 3 others Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Adarsh Bhushan Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 05.04.2025 passed in Writ C No. 9268 of 2025 whereby learned Single Judge, only on account of the fact that the issue raised was pending consideration before the Larger Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court, has granted interim order. 2. The appeal is barred by 75 days. 3. An application under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal has been filed with the submission that the appellant is retired employee and there is no provision for pension and he has no source of income and only on knowledge that this Court in similar nature circumstances had interfered with the order, the present appeal has been filed and, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. 4. In the circumstances of the case, wherein similar nature appeal has already been allowed by this Court, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing the appeal. 5. Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue, as raised in the present appeal, is squarely covered by order in Ram Krishna vs. Secretary Krishi and 3 others : Special Appeal No. 574 of 2025 decided on 11.07.2025. 6. Counsel for the respondents though does not dispute that issue, as raised, is squarely covered by the said order, however submits that order in State of Haryana and others vs. G.D. Goenka Tourism Corporation Limited and another, 2018 (3) SCC 585, could not be cited while arguing the appeal in the case of Ram Krishna (supra) and, therefore, the said order requires reconsideration. 7. Perused the order produced by the counsel for the respondents. The order in question only pertains to the issue pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and no law has been laid down therein, whereas the judgements relied on by this Court while passing the order impugned, specifically deals with the said fact situation and, therefore, the judgment in the case of State of Haryana (supra) would have no application. 8. This Court while deciding the appeal in the case of Ram Krishna (supra) inter alia came to the following conclusions:- "25. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that passing of interim order by the learned Single Judge, staying the award only on account of pendency of reference made to the Larger Bench, moreso when the plea of availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 7(7) of the Act was also specifically raised by the appellant, who had appeared through caveat, appears to be not justified. However, at the same time, it is also observed as to under what circumstances availability of alternative remedy can be bypassed, so as to entertain a writ petition, is always in the discretion of the Court while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 26. Leaving the said exercise to be taken care of by the learned Single Judge in his own discretion, we are satisfied that passing of an interim order based upon reasoning given therein, appears to be not justified and, therefore, we are inclined to allow the present appeal and remit the matter to the stage of fresh consideration of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge. 27. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 06.05.2025 passed in learned Single Judge in Writ C No.14071 of 2025 is hereby set aside. 28. Writ C No.14071 of 2025 shall now be listed before appropriate Single Bench on 24.07.2025 as a fresh case." 9. In view of above, the present appeal is also allowed in the light of similar observations as made in the case of Ram Krishna (supra). The order dated 05.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ C No. 9268 of 2025 is set aside. The writ petition will now be listed before the appropriate Bench. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 nd (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad