Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9364 of 2019 Petitioner :- Dr. Lal Pratap Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the record.
Vide order dated 9.7.2019 learned Standing Counsel was granted time to file counter affidavit. Notices were issued to respondent no. 5 by registered post AD. Office report dated 31.8.2020 indicates that neither acknowledgment nor undelivered cover has been returned. In such view of the matter, service on respondent no.5 is deemed to be sufficient.
Present petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"i) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the respondent no. 2 to extend the benefit of pension, insurance and contributory provident fund to the petitioners' institution within the purview of the Uttar Pradesh State Aided Education Institution Contributory Provident Fund-Insurance-Pension Rules, 1964 and Uttar Pradesh Training Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act 1978.
ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the respondents to provide all service benefits to the petitioners while discharging their duties on the post of Lecturers and instructor in Sri Gandhi Smarak Physical Education Training Mahavidyalaya, Samodhpur, Jaunpur as has been provided to other teachers/staff of the other institutions similarly run in the same institution.
iii) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the respondent no. 2 to decide the pending representation dated 23.12.2018 of the petitioners within a fix period."
The petitioners are claiming benefit of triple benefit scheme. It is submitted that the petitioners have already filed several representations before the respondent authorities, however, their claim is not being considered by the respondent authorities.
In view of the fact that the claim of the petitioners is yet to be considered by the authority concerned on its own merit, this Court is of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioners can first be looked into by the respondent no. 2. For this purpose, the petitioners may file a fresh representation before the said respondent.
In view of the aforesaid, without going into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, this petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation before respondent no. 2 raising their grievances along with self-attested copy of this order, which may be verified from the official website of this Court by the authority concerned, which shall be considered and decided by the respondent no. 2 strictly in accordance with law on its own merit, preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of such representation.
It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the claim of the petitioner, which shall be looked into by the said respondent while deciding the claim of the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Abhishek