Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

V K Saxena vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8350 of 2021 Petitioner :- V.K.Saxena Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Pandey,Kamini Pandey (Dubey) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner was initially appointed as Gram Sewak and subsequently, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Sanitary Inspector (Health Inspection) by the order dated 02.09.1964. He took the charge of Sanitary Inspector on 12.09.1964. Thereafter, the petitioner was made permanent as Sanitary Inspector by the order dated 20.12.1977 with effect from 01.04.1975. On the date when he took charge as Sanitary Inspector, he was also given the charge of Food Inspector. Subsequently, the charge of Sanitary Inspector was taken from him and he continued to work as Food Inspector.The petitioner retired on 31.08.1992.
It appears that there arose some dispute between the Sanitary Inspector and the Director General Health and Family Welfare Services, Lucknow regarding the qualification of Health Supervisor and some of the employees approached the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow by filing a claim petition, which was allowed by the Tribunal vide order dated 16.11.1998. Against which, the State preferred a Writ Petition No.336 (S/B) of 2000, and a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.07.2007, modified the order of the tribunal and issued the following directions:-
"In the result, the writ petition is partly allowed and the impugned order dated 16.11.1998 of tribunal in so far as the direction Nos.6 to 8 in the operative part of the judgement are set aside and instead we substitute the same with the following directions:-
(i) The State shall give notional promotions and all other benefits to the claimants but so far as payment of arrears of salary is concerned, the same shall be given from the date of actual promotion. However, the salary on promoted post of the concerned employees shall be fixed notionally from the due date of promotion for all other purposes and in case where the employees have retired, the benefits may be taken into account for the purpose of retiral benefits and retiral benefits shall be paid to such employees from the date of retirement.
(ii) In order to give effect to the directions of the tribunal as amended in this judgement, it is open to the State to take all such other actions as is permissible in law and are necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs."
It appears that pursuant to the judgement of this Court in Writ Petition No.336 (S/B) of 2000, dated 19.07.2007, the Director General Family Welfare, Lucknow, respondent no.2, wrote a letter dated 02.04.2010 to all Additional Regional Director, Health and Family Welfare, U.P. directing them to provide the list of all the employees for promotion on the post of Medical Education Officer.
Pursuant to the letter dated 02.04.2010 of the Director General Family Welfare, Lucknow, a list of eligible employees for promotion was supplied wherein the name of the petitioner appeared in District Rampur at Sl. No.2 showing his seniority at 10th place, copy of the said list is annexed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition, but the respondents have acted illegally in not taking any decision on the claim of the petitioner.
Since, nothing has been done by the respondents for extending the benefit of judgment of this Court pursuant to the letter dated 02.04.2010 of the Director General Family Welfare, Lucknow, petitioner submitted an application under Right to Information Act and the petitioner was informed that certain query has been made by the Director General Family Welfare, Lucknow from the Chief Medical Officer, Rampur and as soon as the information sought is received, the decision in respect of claim of the petitioner would be taken. The petitioner has also produced the letter dated 18.03.2021 issued by the Joint Director, Family Welfare addressed to the Chief Medical Officer, Rampur asking him to provide the information in respect of petitioner, as stated in the said said letter, so that necessary decision can be taken in respect of claim of the petitioner.
In the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner prayed for the following relief:-
"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to promote the petitioner from Food Inspector to Health Education Officer in pursuance of the order dated 19.07.2007 passed by this Hon'ble Court (Lucknow Bench) in Writ Petitiion No.336 (S/B) of 2000 , State of U.P. and others Versus Sri Yadu Nath Singh and others.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents pension benefits should be given to the petitioner by fixing the salary from the date of notional promotion in pursuance of the order dated 02.04.2010 passed by the Director General Family Welfare, U.P. at Lucknow/respondent no.2.
iii. Issue any writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondents no.2-Director General Family Welfare Services, U.P., Lucknow, along with a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, raising all his grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a period of two months thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of subject to the observations made above.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 NS
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

V K Saxena vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2021
Judges
  • Saral Srivastava
Advocates
  • Anand Kumar Pandey Kamini Pandey Dubey