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

Smt. Premlata Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 February, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This Court has passed order dated 25.02.2019 as under:-
"Shri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an erstwhile employee of UPTRON India Limited. She is working in Mid Day Meal Authority. In the year 2011 the rules for absorption of the employees of the UPTRON India Limited were framed namely "The Uttar Pradesh Absorption of Surplus Employees of UPTRON India Limited in Government Service Rules, 2011". But till date no decision has been taken in regard to the absorption of the petitioner despite repeated letters written by the Director of the Mid Day Meal Authority dated 29.03.2012, 02.08.2017 and 04.04.2018 contained in Annexure No.20 to the writ petition. In the said letters the director has written that the 75 employees of UPTRON Inida Limited have been absorbed in the Basic Education Department but the petitioner has been left to be absorbed and made a recommendation for absorption of the petitioner but no decision has been taken by the Government till date. The petitioner will retire on 28.02.2019 while she is liable to continue till the age of retirement in Basic Education Department.
He further submitted that in identical matter this Court had allowed bunch of writ petitions vide judgment and order dated 29.05.2014, being leading writ petition 3316 (S/S) of 2013;Brahmanand Lavania and Others vs. State of U.P and Others and the petitioner therein has been directed to be absorbed in the Basic Education Department, who was working in Sarva Siksha Abhiyan. The special appeal filed against the judgment being Special Appeal Defective No.430 of 2014; State of U.P. and Others Vs. Brahmanand Lavania and Others has been dismissed by means of the order dated 08.08.2014. Thereafter the other employees have also been granted benefit of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge and the judgment of the special appeal. Recently also writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge being Writ Petition No.17657 (S/S) of 2016. The State Government had filed a Special Appeal Defective No.640 of 2018 which has been dismissed by the order dated 20.12.2018. Therefore the submission is that the petitioner is also entitled for the benefit of the judgment passed by this Court and for absorption.
Shri Pankaj Khare, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appearing for the State, could not apparently dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner except that he submitted that the petitioner is to be absorbed in accordance with the service rules of the concerned department. However he seeks 24 hours time to seek instructions as to whether any decision has been taken or not on the recommendation of the Director and if the decision is taken to place the order passed thereon before this Court.
Put up tomorrow i.e 26.02.2019 as fresh."
Sri Pankaj Khare, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has submitted that he could not receive complete instructions in the matter, therefore, he may be granted atleast one more day time to seek instructions in the matter and he shall try his level best to apprise the Court about the instructions by 28.02.2019.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner is going to retire at the age of 58 years on 28.02.2019 and if no interim protection is granted in her favour, she shall be compelled to retire on 28.02.2019.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is ready for absorption and she shall abide all the terms and conditions of the rules if her services are absorbed in the State Government.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards various orders of this Court whereby the petitioners of that writ petition have been extended the benefit of the judgment and order dated 29.05.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.3316 (S/S) of 2013, which has been confirmed by this Court in Special Appeal Defective No.430 of 2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court towards one order dated 15.05.2013 passed in Writ Petition No.2783 (S/S) of 2013 whereby this Court was pleaded to permit the petitioners of that writ petition to continue in the department till further orders of this Court.
Since Sri Pankaj Khare, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has sought one day time to seek instructions in the matter in terms of order dated 25.02.2019, therefore, the order of interim protection is not granted today, but in any case, the required instructions are not received by Sri Pankaj Khare on or before 28.02.2019, this Court may grant interim protection to the petitioner on the next date of listing considering the peculiar facts of the case that the petitioner is going to retire on 28.02.2019.
List/ put up this case on 28.02.2019 as fresh.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
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

Smt. Premlata Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 February, 2019
Judges
  • Rajesh Singh Chauhan