Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10176 of 2021 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Nigam Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashvni Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent to pay the salary of Rs. 3650/- payable from 01.01.1999 as per the fixation order of 24.09.1999 and all due increment to be applicable from 01.01.2000 onward.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent to pay the post retirement benefit forthwith i.e. gratuity, ACP and full amount of pension to the petitioner calculated in accordance with law from the date of superannuation of the petitioner i.e. 31.01.2015.
(iii) Payment of arrears of salary and allowance after setting aside the order of termination i.e. from 31.07.1999 till his retirement with interest, as clarified in legal opinion dated 30.07.2015 of the Respondent department.
(iv) Fixation and grant of full pension as on 31.01.2015 (i.e. date of retirement of petitioner) on the basis of fixation of pay and allowance as on 01.01.1999 and 19.04.2008 and payment of arrear, pension and allowances with all consequential benefit strictly in accordance with applicable Pay Commission.
(v) To declare the non-Payment of revised salary and pension on basic pay scale of Rs. 3650/- from 01.01.1999 is violative of Article 14, 16, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India.
(vi) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of måndamus directing the Respondent to accord following benefits forthwith without any further delay.
(vii) Issue any other writ, order or directions which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of Justice."
I have heard Sri Shivam Yadav, Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. He, on instructions, states that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent authorities ventilating his grievances, the same shall be considered in accordance with law with all expedition.
Considering the said statement given by the counsel for the Respondent No. 2, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Respondent No. 2, who shall take a decision thereupon in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of a copy of the representation and a copy of this order.
Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of the order.
Order Date :- 13.8.2021 vinay