Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12846 of 2018 Petitioner :- Safina Masarrat Chandel Respondent :- The Advocate General And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avanish Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General and Sri Y.K. Srivastava, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Vikram Bahadur Yadav, learned standing counsel are present in the Court.
The dispute being raised in the present petition is with regard to the seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis other respondents, namely, 2, 3 and 4. The petitioner and three incumbents are placed in the seniority list finalized on 2.3.2012.
The petitioner seeks to submit that she was engaged on a class- III post as early as in the year 1999 and her engagement on the post of Lower Division Clerk has been regularized in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 vide office order dated 22.12.2001 issued from the office of the Advocate General, High Court Allahabad. In the earlier seniority list published in the department, their seniority was determined. The petitioner was at Serial No. 10 i.e. much above the respondent nos. 2, 3, 4. But in the seniority list finalized on 21.3.2012, she has been placed much below them.
Sri Y.K. Srivastava, learned Chief Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the petitioner for counting of her services rendered in class III post and to add it in the Account Department cannot be considered. Submission is that the Account Section had been created in the year 2005. The impugned seniority list has been finalized as early as in the year 2012, after publication of the tentative seniority list inviting objections of the concerned employees.
The petitioner cannot be allowed to challenge the seniority which has been fixed about six years back.
In rejoinder, it is vehemently reiterated by learned counsel for the petitioner that there has been no disengagement of his service in the office of the Advocate General rather her appointment in the Account Department is in continuation of her previous engagement. The petitioner was also accorded promotional pay scale in the Account Department. It is contended that despite repeated applications moved by the petitioner, till date, there has been no consideration by the learned Advocate General, High Court Allahabad.
The contention is that the petitioner has been given promise each time that her claim would be considered in the light of the relevant statutory provisions but there has been no consideration at all.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the grievances being raised by the petitioner herein are required to be addressed by the learned Advocate General, High Court Allahabad.
For the purpose the entire matter shall be placed before the Advocate General within a period of six weeks from today, who shall consider and take an appropriate decision, in accordance with law, expeditiously, after appreciation of the records of his office and pass a reasoned and speaking order, preferably, within a further period of four weeks, thereafter.
In case the Advocate General U.P. Allahabad finds it appropriate, he shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner as well as respondents 2, 3 and 4. In any case, the decision so taken shall be duly communicated to the petitioner, immediately thereafter.
In view of above noted facts, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018
AK Pandey