Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20133 of 2018 Petitioner :- Anita Saxsena Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kuldeep Singh, Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Petitioner is seeking parity with one Jagdish Prasad, who was also employed on the post of Lab Assistant. Jagdish Prasad had filed Writ Petition (S/S) No. 6505 of 2013, which has been disposed of on 9.5.2016. Order dated 9.5.2016 is reproduced hereinafter:-
"Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of State-respondents.
The petitioners had previously approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition No. 2174 (S/S) of 2013 which was disposed of by order dated 17.04.2013 directing the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners grievance as regards the pay scale claimed by them by a speaking and reasoned order.
The impugned order dated 20.06.2013 has been passed in compliance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court.
The contention of the petitioner is that while working on the post of Lab Assistant he is entitled to a basic pay of Rs. 13160/- plus Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- which is paid to a similarly situated person namely Sri Ram Pati Gupta working in the same department on the same post. This fact came to the notice of the petitioner after filing of the present writ petition but at the same time it being a relevant aspect of the matter was lost sight of while passing the impugned order. The reasons assigned in the impugned order have thus been challenged on the ground that the similarly situated person having been given the benefit of higher pay scale in term of the Government Order dated 08.09.2010 while holding the same post entitles the petitioner to the same benefit on the ground of parity.
The respondents in their counter affidavit have disputed the claim but the position remains unexplained with respect to the order dated 29.11.2014 issued in favour of a similarly situated person on the basis of Government Order dated 08.09.2010.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.06.2013 is hereby set aside and the competent authority is directed to reconsider the matter in the light of order dated 29.11.2014 read with Government Order dated 08.09.2010. This exercise shall be completed not later than a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order alongwith the fresh representation by the respondents.
The writ petition is disposed of".
2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner's grievance shall be examined by the authority concerned, in accordance with law.
3. In view of the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no. 2 to take a decision, keeping in view the observations made by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 6505 of 2013, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the petitioner's entitlement, and all issues are left open to be considered by the authority concerned, at the first instance, as per law.
Order Date :- 19.9.2018 prateek