One of the petitioners, namely, Bachchu Lal had earlier filed writ petition No. 1543 (SS) of 2000 wherein the petitioner has sought for a direction in the mandamus commanding the opposite parties to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Collection Amin from the date his juniors have been regularized w.e.f.17.1.1991.The said writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 14.2.2005 with the direction to respondents that in case the services of the juniors to the petitioner has been regularized as alleged, then the case of the petitioner will be considered with effect from the date of regularization of that junior considering the law that the right of the senior for consideration of regularization is superior in comparison to similarly circumstanced junior.
Submission of the petitioner's Counsel is that in compliance of the order of the writ court, respondents instead of regularizing the service has given substantive appointment on 25.6.2011 in utter disregard of the directions issued by this Court. It is also submitted that on account of giving substantive appointment from 25.6.2011, they have been deprived of their promotional pay scale, which otherwise ought to have been payable in the year 2007. It has also been pointed out that services of one Dilip Kumar Awasthi have been regularized vide order dated 12.2.2007 w.e.f. 27.4.2005 and has been given promotional pay scale in view of the G.O. dated 2.12.2000 on completion of 14 years services and the petitioner has been discriminated.
Learned Standing Counsel is directed to seek instructions as why the directions of this Court given earlier in the matter of petitioners has not been complied and under what circumstances the petitioner has been given substantive appointment w.e.f. 25.6.2011 and has been discriminated with Dilip Kumar Awasthi.
List this case on 18.1.2016.
Order Date :- 6.1.2016 MH/-