A recent review has affirmed the allocation of a government employee to the state of Uttarakhand, following a judicial directive. The individual, Shri Dilip Kumar, had sought a revision of his assignment, initially placed in Uttarakhand under the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000. A High Court order had prompted a reconsideration by the Union of India, mandating a thorough review process, including opportunities for hearing and reasoned decision-making. However, a committee tasked with this review noted that no new appeal was submitted by the petitioner. Furthermore, an earlier representation against the initial allocation list had already been considered and rejected by a State Advisory Committee, citing his junior position in the cadre. Consequently, the government has upheld the committee’s recommendation, ensuring the employee remains allocated to Uttarakhand. This decision underscores the robust process for resolving inter-state cadre allocation disputes.
SOURCE PDF LINK :
Click to view full document content
No.27/07/2011-SRS
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, P.G. and Pensions
Department of Personnel \& Training
$3^{\text {rd }}$ floor,Lok Nayak Bhavan,
New Delhi, June 2011
To
1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, Deharadun.
Sub:- Consideration of representation of Shri Dilip Kumar, Food \& Civil Supplies Department in compliance of the directions dated 19/11/2009 of Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Writ Petition No.11519/2006 – regarding
Sir,
I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and to say that Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in W.P. No.711519/2006 linked with W.P. No.49431/2005(Ram Pal Singh) vide order dated 19/11/2009 directed that “The case in which objections are not considered, the same will be considered by the Union of India in consultation with the state/s under section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order upon giving fullest opportunity of hearing and by passing a reasoned order in the individual cases. At the time of passing order, the authority concerned will give preferential value to the modalities already made known to the parties for the purpose. So far as consequential orders re-cuncerned, since consideration by the Union 1. 2ndis in consultation with the State/s is already over, the consequential orders will be passed also within such period. However the orders which will be passed finally in respect of any of the matters upon consideration of objection or communication of consequential orders will be finally binding upon the parties. Accordingly all the writ petitions are disposed of however without imposing any cost.”
2. The matter was considered by the Committee in its meeting held on 14-2-2011. The Committee was informed that no new representation has been received from the petitioner in pursuance of the Hon’ble Court’s direction. It took cognizance that his original representation against Tentative Final Allocation List was considered by the State Advisory Committee in the meeting held on 7-7-2005 and was rejected being juniormost in the cadre.
The Committee, therefore, recommended for rejection of revision of his allocation to Uttar Pradesh.
3. The Government of India has accepted the recommendation of the Committee and accordingly final allocation of Shri Dilip Kumar continues to be the successor State of Uttarakhand. The officer/official concerned may kindly be apprised accordingly.
Yours faithfully,
S. Nayak
(S.Nayak)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Copy to:
- Sh. R.M. Srivastava, Principal Secretary, U.P. Reorganisation Coordination Department, Vikas Bhawan,Janpath Market, Lucknow.
- The Principal, Secretary, Reorganisation, Govt. of Uttarakhand, Dehradun.
- The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.
- The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun.
