Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5437 of 2019 Petitioner :- Praduman Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahesh Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioners alleging that petitioners were regularized on 15.10.2008. It is stated that petitioners approached this Court arguing that the persons, who were junior to the petitioners were regularized w.e.f. 17.01.1992 and as such, the petitioners were also entitled to their regularization with effect from the same date. The writ petition filed by the petitioners being Writ Petition No. 64644 of 2011 was decided on 12.05.2015 with direction to the respondents to grant the petitioners all the benefits which were granted to one Chandra Bhushan Yadav and Ramanand Yadav.
It is argued that subsequent to the said order, an order was passed regularizing the services of the petitioners w.e.f. 17.01.1992. However, it was indicated that the said order shall be subject to outcome of review petition filed in Writ Petition No.69336 of 2004. He argued that subsequently, an order dated 26.11.2016 was passed granting the petitioners benefit of pay scale and revision of their pay in terms of the order passed by this Court. It is argued that the petitioners had retired from service and they were denied the benefit of pension and other retiral dues, solely on the ground that services of the petitioners were regularized from 15.10.2008. The counsel for the petitioners argued that once the issue has been decided and consequential order has been passed, stand taken by the respondents is wholly unjustified.
Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents argued that a review petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 69336 of 2004 which is pending. However, counsel for the petitioner argues that the order against which a review has been filed was challenged in an appeal and the appeal also has been dismissed, He thus, argues that the review petition becomes meaningless in view of the doctrine of merger whereby the order impugned has now merged in the appellate order and admittedly no review of the appellate order has been filed.
Once the order dated 26.11.2016 (Annexure-6) came to be passed giving the benefit of service w.e.f. 17.01.92 in respect of petitioners, the stand of the respondents that the service of the petitioners stood regularized from a date later than 2005 cannot be accepted.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay retiral dues to the petitioners after computing the amount due and payable in terms of orders dated 26th November, 2016. The order dated 11.01.2019 is set aside.
It is clarified that the orders with regard to payment of pension shall be passed computing the regularization of services of the petitioners w.e.f. 17.01.1992. The said amount after calculation shall be paid to the petitioners with all expedition within a period of four months from the date of petitioners approaching the respondents.
Order Date :- 22.9.2021 SS