Court No. - 4
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1223 of 2018 Applicant :- Chhotelal Ram Opposite Party :- Manju Sharma, Additional Director Of Education (Madhyamik) And Another Counsel for Applicant :- J.P.N. Singh
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The applicant has preferred the present contempt application for non-compliance of judgment and order dated 12.09.2017 passed in Civil Writ-A No. 42360 of 2017 (Chhotelal Ram Vs. State of U.P. And 4 Others). The aforesaid order is quoted below:-
"The petitioner was working as Lecturer in the recognized and aided institution namely Janta Inter College, Nagara, District Ballia. He reached the age of superannuation on 30.06.2014.
The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 04.03.2016 and the direction issued by this Court on 13.01.2017 in Writ Petition No. 26307 of 2010, the arrears of salary of the petitioner which was stopped in compliance of the order of this Court has not been released so far.
The Court has issued various directions to the State Government. One of the Directions issued by this Court is that to constitute a Committee to verify the fact regarding the existence of the sanctioned post in the institution.
It is stated that the State Government in compliance of the directions of this Court had constituted the Committee to consider the matter, which has found that in the institution there are 15 posts of Lecturers and 14 posts of Assistant Teachers. A copy of the order of the State Government dated 01.02.2016 issued by the Principal Secretary is on record as Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition.
It is stated that this Court in the case of Dhruv Narain Singh vs. State of U.P. and others (Writ -A No. 26307 of 2010) has issued certain directions to verify the strength of the teaching and non teaching staff in the aided and recognized institutions in District Ballia as there was series of allegations of the fabrication of the documents and excess teachers working in the institution who are drawing their salaries from the public exchequer. The said writ petition was finally dispose of by this Court on 13.01.2017 by following direction :-
"Accordingly, this batch of the writ petitions is disposed of with the following direction :-
(i) In case any teacher/institution is aggrieved by the order passed by the Committee, it would be open to him/it to take such recourse which is available under the law to them.
(ii) The salary to all the teachers, who have been found to be working on the sanctioned post shall be released within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order."
It is stated that in the petitioner's institution the Committee has found that the petitioner is working against the sanctioned post.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in my view ends of justice would be subserved by issuing directions upon respondent no. 2 to consider the cause of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. He shall pay regard to the fact that the petitioner's salary has been stopped for the last more than five years and at present, he stood retired. The respondent no. 2 shall make endeavor to pass order without any further loss of time expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. "
An affidavit of compliance was filed by the opposite party. It is stated in paragraph 11 of the affidavit of compliance that after considering the report of Finance Controller and other materials available on record, the representation of the applicant was duly considered and decided by order dated 06.04.2018. The copy of the order is appended as Annexure-2 of the compliance affidavit. It is further stated in paragraph 13 of the affidavit of compliance that authorization letter dated 06.04.2018, was written on behalf of Finance Controller, Directorate of Education (secondary), Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad by which the permission was sought to release the funds in question as stated in the aforesaid letter.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that though the aforesaid letter was also sent in the month of April 2018, but funds has not yet been released.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, and consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present application stands disposed of finally, permitting the applicant to make fresh representation in this regard annexing all the relevant papers and documents before the Finance Controller, Directorate of Education (secondary), Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad, if such representation is made before the aforesaid authority, he will pass an appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of submission of self attested computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, except upon payment of cost if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021 Vikram