Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20278 of 2018 Petitioner :- Devendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Varun Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Lal
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Ashok Kumar Lal, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press the first prayer and pressing only second prayer.
The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Accountant in Atma Nirbhar Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Nagla Birbal, Vikas Khand Sadabad, District Hathras which is a primary agricultural society registered under the provisions of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Ultimately he was placed under suspension by Chairman of the Society vide order dated 23.1.2013. After completing inquiry, his service was terminated vide order 6.1.2015. Against the said order, he preferred an appeal under Section 128 of the Act, which was allowed vide oprder dated 8.4.2015. The said order was challenged by respondent no. 5 before the Joint Secretary, Co-operative, Lucknow under Section 98 of the Act and the order dated 8.4.2015 was quashed by Joint Secretary, Co-operative, against which Writ petition No. 45703 of 2015 was filed which is still pending. Now the case of the petitioner is that during suspension period, he has not been paid subsistence allowance. He further stated that earlier he has also not been paid salary w.e.f. October, 2011 to September, 2012. He retired from service on 15.6.2018. He also stated that the Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Co-operative, Hathras has written a letter dated 22.2.2018 to the District Magistrate, Hathras for taking action against the respondent no.5. He has also written a letter dated 2.7.2018 addressed to the Commissioner and Registrar, Co-operative, U.P. Lucknow stating that Branch Manager is responsible for non- payment of dues admissible to the petitioner, therefore, for redressal of his grievance, he may move a representation. Therefore, he moved a representation dated 18.7.2018 before the respondent no. 2 which has not been decided and till date he has not been paid arrears of salary as well as subsistence allowance.
Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that a direction may be issued to the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner.
Sri Ashok Kuar Lal, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has no objection to the prayer made by petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, with the consent of the parties, without adverting on the merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 18.7.2018 within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 20.9.2018 Rmk.