1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The writ-Court vide judgment and order dated 29.11.2018 allowed Writ Petition No.3293 (S/S) of 2009 filed by the petitioner, who got retired from service on 15.06.2015, in the following terms:-
"Having considered the submissions raised as also another Division Bench judgment taking notice of these facts in Writ Petition No.777 of 2001 decided on 24.7.2014 by the High Court, we find that the petitioner's case also deserves to be considered as he is placed similarly as against those whose writ petitions have been allowed and directions have been issued for consideration although the petitioner in the present Writ Petition has not challenged the orders dated 24.3.2001 and 14.4.2001. The only distinction is that the petitioner is a Project Officer and, therefore, he is holding a higher post than the Assistant Project Officer.
The nature of the dispute, therefore, having been settled by the High Court and Supreme Court as indicated above, we allow the petition and set aside the order dated 10.02.2009 with a direction to the State Government to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the decisions referred to herein above preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of this order. The consequential orders also stand quashed accordingly, in so far as the petitioner is concerned."
.
3. In compliance of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 29.11.2018 and pursuant to issuance of contempt notice, affidavit of compliance of Mr. Rajendra Kumar Tiwari, Additional Chief Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow has been filed.
Along wit the aforesaid affidavit of compliance, copy of decision dated 14.05.2019 has been placed on record as Annexure C-1. It has been said that the petitioner, who was employed initially in a scheme of the Central Government named as 'Non-Formal Education' on the post of Project Officer was accommodated in State Government service, considering the human aspect inasmuch as he had rendered the service for quite some-time in the said scheme of the Central Government, which was a temporary scheme. The scheme was abolished in 2001. The petitioner was appointed as LT Grade Teacher and he got retired from service on 15.06.2015. It has been further said that the petitioner was appointed in the service of the State Government and no assurance was given to him for pay-protection and he accepted the offer of appointment and, thus, after his retirement, there is no question of giving him the pay-protection, as claimed by him.
4. Considering the aforesaid decision dated 14.05.2019 taken in the case of the petitioner in compliance of the judgment and order dated 29.11.2018, I consider that there has been no defiance/willful disobedience of the judgment and order in question and the present contempt petition has lost its efficacy and is, thus, dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
5. However, if the petitioner feels aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 14.05.2019 taken in the case of the petitioner, rejecting his claim for pay-protection on the post of Project Officer in non-formal education scheme, which is a temporary scheme funded by the Central Government, he may approach the competent Court/authority, if he is so advised and law permits.
[Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.] Order Date :- 30.7.2019 MVS/-