Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 55 of 2021 Petitioner :- Pawan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Raksha Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vashishtha Tiwari
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This writ petition is directed against an order dated 4.11.2020, contained in Annexure-11 to the writ petition. The order impugned has been passed pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in Writ Petition No.387 of 2020, decided on 10.1.2020, which reads as under:-
"Petitioner claims to have worked in the Nagar Panchayat, Goverdhan from October, 2013 to March, 2018. His grievance is that the respondents have unauthorisedely withheld his salary of 32 months and despite repeated representations made the authorities are not passing any order.
Learned counsel for the respondents states that petitioner has not annexed any appointment letter.
Be that as it may, various annexures to the writ petition which are in the nature of certificate evidencing petitioner's working prima facie supports petitioner's contention that he has worked particularly as various amounts are paid by way of cheque copies whereof are annexed. Without expressing any opinion with regard to petitioner's claim for appointment, it would be appropriate to permit petitioner to represent his grievance before respondent No.4 by making a comprehensive representation along with a certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. The concerned respondent would get the facts verified and would take an appropriate decision within a further period of three months, thereafter. All consequential actions would be taken accordingly."
The order impugned records that there are no evidence to prove that petitioner has actually worked as a contract employee for the aforesaid period, and therefore, his claim for payment has been rejected. This order is assailed on the ground that previous authorities have already certified petitioner's working, and therefore, the order impugned is bad in law.
Petition is opposed by Sri Vashishtha Tiwari for the respondent nos.2 to 4.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials brought on record.
The factual issue that requires determination in the facts of the case is as to whether the petitioner has actually worked for the aforesaid period or not. The issue is primarily factual in nature and would require leading of evidence so as to establish petitioner's claim. In the opinion of the Court, such issue would be better got examined by the appropriate industrial court where questions of fact can more conveniently be examined. Writ petition would not be the appropriate remedy for such purposes, at the first instance.
In view of the above discussions, this Court declines to interfere in the present writ petition. It is provided that in the event petitioner approaches the competent authority with respect to refer the dispute to the Industrial Forum then endeavours would be made to dispose of such claim, at the earliest possible.
Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is consigned to records.
Order Date :- 8.1.2021 Anil