Court No. - 43
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6644 of 2019 Petitioner :- Markandey Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This petition is directed against an order dated 31.01.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner/Assistant Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Ghazipur. This order has been passed on the basis of a direction issued by this Court on 25.09.2018 in Writ Petition No.20562 of 2018, which is extracted hereinafter:
"Heard Sri Rajendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for State-respondents.
The writ petition has been filed for mandamus directing the Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ghazipur to pay the salary and all the consequential benefits to the petitioner in pursuance of the judgment of Supreme Court dated 10.1.2017 passed in Civil Appeal No. 312 of 2017 (State of UP and others Vs. Chandra Prakash Pandey and others).
It has been stated that the petitioner was appointed as Collection Amin in co-operative department on 27.01.1995. Later on writ petition has been filed before this Court for treating the Collection Amin of co-operative societies as regular Collection Amin appointed in the Collectorate. The writ petition was allowed by judgment dated 10.10.2002. This judgment was challenged by State of UP in Special Appeals, which were consolidated and dismissed by judgment dated 19.10.2010. State of UP, thereafter filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which was converted into Civil Appeal No. 312 of 2017 and all the appeals were consolidated and decided by judgment dated 10.1.2017. Thus in pursuance of the judgement dated 10.10.2002, the petitioner is entitled to be treated as regular Collection Amin at par of Collection Amin posted in the Collectorate and entitled to pay the salary and all the consequential benefits in respect thereof.
The petitioner has moved a representation in this respect, which is pending.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has lastly prayed that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent No. 5 to decide the representation of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of with direction to Assistant Commissioner / Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ghazipur, respondent-5 to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of producing a certified copy of this order before the authority concerned.
The petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation along with certified copy of this order as well as other necessary papers before the authority concerned, within ten days from today.
However, it is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the case on merits."
Although, petitioner places reliance upon the order passed by this Court dated 10.10.2002, as affirmed in special appeal, and also by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.312 of 2017, but it is admitted that the petitioner was not a party therein. Petitioner, therefore, would not be entitled to any relief merely on the basis of such judgement. The order impugned records that the petitioner was appointed as Collection Amin in 1995 and receipt book was issued to him for effecting recovery but the petitioner neither recovered any amount nor deposited the receipt with the department. It is also recorded that the petitioner, without any information, thereafter has absented from duty for more than 25 years. It has also been stated that Recovery Amin is entitled to 4% towards collection charges against the amount of recovery effected, but as petitioner has not recovered any amount, as such, he is not entitled to any benefit.
Though, the aforesaid order is challenged but petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any infirmity in the order. It has not been shown that the petitioner deposited the recovery book, issued on 30.01.1995, nor any other material has been shown to contradict the findings returned in the order itself. Petitioner has otherwise not shown any error in the observation and finding that petitioner has not worked for the last more than 25 years.
In the absence of any material brought before the Court to contradict the finding returned in the order of the Assistant Registrar/Assistant Commissioner, Co-operative Societies, Ghazipur dated 31.01.2019, no interference in the order is required.
The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019/Jitendra