Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Manik Chand Lal Srivastava vs Sri A.K. Bisnoi Posted As Director ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 August, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This contempt petition has been filed for alleged non-compliance/disobedience of the judgment and order dated 23.09.2015 passed by the writ-Court in Writ Petition No.5601 (S/S) of 2015 filed by the petitioner.
The said writ petition was disposed of finally, inter alia, in the following terms:-
"............
The petitioner herein has retired from service on 30th July 2011 after having been appointed on Class IV post way back in the year 1980. Earlier the petitioner had filed a writ petition claiming the release of his post retiral-dues which were paid to him recently. Now, claiming further relief other than those relating to his post-retiral dues he has approached this court seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to give the IInd and IIIrd A.C.Ps. (Assured Career Probation) on the basis of the government orders dated 5.4.2010 and 5.11.2014.
This writ petition having been filed after four years of the petitioner's retirement and much after the alleged date of his entitlement to the aforesaid benefits cannot be entertained at this belated stage. If the petitioner had any grievance, he should have approached the authorities and thereafter this court within a reasonable time.
In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities raising his claim for grant of A.C.Ps. as aforesaid and it shall be open for such authorities to consider the claim as per the relevant rules and government orders."
3. Thus, the only direction was that if the petitioner approached the concerned authorities, his case should be examined and appropriate order to be passed regarding grant of benefits of ACPs.
4. Pursuant to issuance of contempt notice, an affidavit of compliance of Mr. Mukesh Srivastava, Director of Agriculture, U.P., Lucknow was filed, which is on record.
Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said compliance affidavit read as under:-
"5. That it is respectfully submitted that in reference of letter dated 18.09.2015, the Deputy Director, Agriculture, Lucknow had passed an order dated 31.01.2016, by means of which, the A.C.P. of the petitioner has been sanctioned and thereafter the fixation of petitioners A.C.P. has also been made vide Office Order dated 14.03.2016. A copy of letter dated 18.09.2015 and copies of orders dated 31.01.2016 and 14.03.2016 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No.A-1, A-2 and A-3 respectively to this affidavit.
6. That it is further submitted that in pursuance and compliance of aforesaid orders, as well as order passed by Hon'ble High Court, quoted above, the payment of A.C.Ps. amounting of Rs.25,324/- has been made to the petitioner through R.T.G.S. on 31.03.2016. A copy of e-payment receipt dated 31.03.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.A-4 to this affidavit."
5. From the order dated 31.01.2016 enclosed as Annexure A-2 to the said compliance affidavit, it appears that the petitioner has been granted 3rd ACP with effect from 18.11.2008 with grade-pay of Rs.2800/- and difference of payment has been made to the petitioner, which is evident from Annexure A-4 to the aforesaid affidavit.
6. Mr. R.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted on the last date of hearing i.e. 30.07.2019 that no order in respect of grant of second A.C.P. had been passed. In view of the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, on 30.07.2019, passed the following order:-
"In pursuance of the judgement and order dated 23.9.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.5601 (SS) of 2015, an order dated 31.1.2016 has been passed giving the benefit of third ACP to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer in the writ petition was for second and third ACP, but no order in respect of second ACP has been passed.
Ms. Alpana Srivatava, learned Standing Counsel submits that she will file further affidavit in respect of the claim of the petitioner regarding second ACP within a period of four weeks."
.
7. In pursuance of the said order dated 30.07.2019, Ms. Alpana Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel, has tendered a compliance affidavit of Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Assistant Agriculture Engineer, today in the Court, which is taken on record.
Paragraphs-7,8 and 9 of the said affidavit read as under:-
"7. That thereafter by means of order dated 22.01.2001 the benefit of Ist promotional pay scale of Rs.2610-60-3150-65-3540 as per IInd A.C.P. has been granted to the petitioner from 18.11.1996 after completing 16 years of satisfactory services. The benefit of selection grade has also been granted to the petitioner from 18.11.2000 after completing the 4 years of satisfactory services. A copy of order dated 22.01.2001 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.A-2 to this affidavit.
8. That thereafter, the Deputy Director, Agriculture, U.P., Lucknow vide order dated 31.01.2016 has granted the Grade Pay of Rs.2800 to the petitioner as per IIIrd A.C.P. from 18.11.2006 after completing the 26 years of satisfactory services. A copy of order dated 31.01.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.A-3 to this affidavit.
9. That in view of above, it is evident that already the benefit of 1st promotional pay scale of Rs.2610-60-3150-65-3540 as per IInd A.C.P. has been granted to the petitioner from 18.11.1996 after completing 16 years of satisfactory services and therefore the benefit of IInd A.C.P. is not due"
8. In view of the aforesaid stand that the petitioner has been granted the second A.C.P. in his first promotional pay-scale of Rs.2610-60-3150-65-3540 with effect from 18.11.2006 after completion of 16 years, I do not think it appropriate to keep this contempt petition pending any further in this Court and the same is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
Contempt notice stands discharged.
However, if the petitioner is left with any grievance in respect of the aforesaid stand of the contemnor-respondent, regarding granting him the second promotional pay-scale, it would be open to approach the competent Court/authority, if he is so advised and law permits.
[Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.] Date :- 29.8.2019 MVS/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Manik Chand Lal Srivastava vs Sri A.K. Bisnoi Posted As Director ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 August, 2019
Judges
  • Dinesh Kumar Singh