Heard Sri Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Sridhar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel for Respondent No.1 and Sri Shailendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for Respondent No.2.
The present writ petition has been filed for directing the Respondent No.2 to pay the salary to the petitioner for the Class III post alongwith arrears of salary w.e.f. 8.11.1995 and further direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner for regular substantive promotion to the Class III Post from the date his juniors have been promoted.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on 8.7.1985 on Class IV post on daily-wages in the office of Respondent No.2. The petitioner was asked to do clerical work since 1993. Looking to his performance, a proposal had been forwarded for the approval of the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari for continuance of the petitioner on the clerical post and the same had been approved by the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari vide its order dated 2.11.1995.
On 8.11.1995 an order was passed for posting the petitioner on the post of clerk with a condition that the matter of the petitioner will be placed before the Selection Committee for regular promotion.
The petitioner was working on the post of clerk but the salary was not paid to him for the said post. Hence the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition for grant of reliefs mentioned above. On 18.07.2007 an interim order was passed by this Court for payment of salary to the petitioner and the same has been complied with and the petitioner is getting salary for the post of clerk w.e.f. 6.5.2009.
It is further submitted that the Selection Committee was constituted on 15.10.2009, 4.9.2009 and 5.4.2010 i.e. after the order dated 08.11.1995, where the candidature of several Class IV employees were considered for promotion on the post of clerk, but the case of the petitioner was not placed before the Committee. The petitioner has continuously been functioning on the post of clerk from last 28 years and he is going to retire soon.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 has submitted that no one junior to the petitioner has been promoted on the post of Clerk and whenever the Selection Committee will be constituted, the candidature of the petitioner will be considered for regular promotion on the post of clerk.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the documents filed alongwith the supplementary affidavit dated 6.7.2009 i.e. the list of Class IV employees, in which the name of the petitioner finds place at Serial No.62 and the persons who are at Serial No.72, 74, 75 and 83, who are junior to the petitioner have been considered and granted regular promotion on the post of clerk in the year 2010 itself.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is found that the petitioner is working on the post of clerk since 5.2.1993 and getting the salary of the post of Clerk since 6.5.2009. As per order dated 8.11.1995, the case of the petitioner was to be placed before the Selection Committee for the purposes of grant of regular promotion on the post of clerk, but the same has not been placed till date, though the Selection Committee held thrice as mentioned above. The persons junior to the petitioner have already been granted regular promotion on the post of clerk in the year 2010 itself. The action on the part of respondents is arbitrary and discriminatory.
Under these circumstances, the Respondent No.2 is directed to place the case of the petitioner before the Selection Committee for consideration of his regular promotion on the post of clerk, expeditiously, say within a period of three months and a decision shall be taken within two weeks from the of recommendation of the Selection Committee.
The petitioner shall continue to get the salary for the post of clerk in terms of the earlier order of this Court dated 18.07.2007. In so far prayer for arrears of salary of the post of clerk since 8.11.1995 to 5.5.2009, the petitioner is entitled for the same also since Annexure 6 to the writ petition clearly shows that the petitioner was required to work on the post of clerk and accordingly, he performed the duties as such during the above period, therefore, he cannot be denied salary of the post on which he continued to work as required. The Respondent No.2 is also directed to make payment of arrears of salary on the post of clerk w.e.f. 8.11.1995 till 5.5.2009 within a period of 3 months.
In the result the writ petition is allowed with direction as indicated above.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021 S. Kumar