Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20042 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manta Ram Gupta,Neetu Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This writ petition is directed against an order passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sirathu, District Kaushambi, dated 14.3.2012. The order records that petitioner was engaged for a very short period in 1987 against a vacancy caused due to retirement of one Ram Shankar Tripathi. It appears that petitioner's services were not renewed on account of which he approached this Court by filing writ petition in the year 1991, wherein an interim order came to be passed in his favour on 8.1.1991. This writ petition was dismissed in default in 2009. A restoration application filed in the matter was also rejected on 9.2.2012. It appears that a Special Appeal No.199 of 2012 was thereafter filed, which was also rejected. It is thereafter that a consequential order has been passed on 14.3.2012. This order is challenged in this petition after 06 years, without explaining any reasons for belated filing of the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was entitled to a notice being served upon him and to an opportunity of hearing before passing the order.
Petition is opposed by learned Standing Counsel.
Perusal of the record would clearly go to show that petitioner was engaged pursuant to an interim order passed by this Court on 23.1.1991. His continuance was under an interim order. The writ petition had ultimately been dismissed. Application for recall and thereupon a special appeal filed in the matter had also been rejected. The decision taken by the authority vide order impugned to discontinue petitioner's engagement is consequent upon the order passed by this Court, and no separate opportunity of hearing was required to be given to the petitioner, at this stage.
However, as petitioner admittedly has worked for the period for which salary was paid to him, there would be no justification to allow the authorities to recover the amount paid to petitioner. This observation is being made in exercise the equity jurisdiction of this Court. The direction issued to recover the amount is set aside.
Subject to the aforesaid modification, this writ petition is consigned to records.
Order Date :- 18.9.2018 Anil