Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15195 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Tewari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Samarath Singh,Sankalp Narain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
While entertaining this writ petition following orders were passed on 20.7.2018:-
"An order of dismissal passed against the petitioner was challenged in Writ Petition No.17468 of 2010, which came to be allowed by this Court on 30.3.2015 vide following orders:-
"The allegation against the petitioner is primarily of a general nature of not defending the camp at the time of the naxal attack. The appellate authority had noted the background in which the petitioner along with other constables acted at the relevant time. The guard strength was inadequate, seven guards against eleven, of which two guards, including the petitioner, were assigned the work of a cook. The Commander was not available when approximately fifty naxals attacked the camp. In these circumstances the first reaction of the guards was to take shelter to save their lives. The appellate authority in these circumstances and on considering the material, evidence and statements of the guards was of the view that the petitioner was wrongly held guilty by the Disciplinary Authority. The penalty awarded to other constables, in the admitted circumstances, was far lesser. The revisional authority failed to record as to how the charges of misconduct was not identical to that of Sanjai Kumar Rai or the petitioner was foisted with more serious charges. In this background the revisional authority exceeded his jurisdiction in interfering with penalty proposed by the appellate authority.
For the law and reasons stated above, the impugned order dated 15.12.2009 passed by the Inspector General of Police (P.A.C..), Eastern Zone, U.P., Lucknow is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed. The writ petition is allowed with all consequential benefits. No order as to costs."
The authorities, pursuant to the aforesaid order, have fixed petitioner's salary and arrears of wages due under the aforesaid order have been denied vide order impugned dated 19.9.2016. Aggrieved by the denial of back wages, petitioner is before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the denial of benefit of arrears, in the facts and circumstances of the case is contemptuous and cannot be sustained.
Learned Standing Counsel may obtain instructions in the matter. Put up in the additional cause list on 30.7.2018."
The matter was adjourned on subsequent dates to enable the respondents to comply with the order dated 30.3.2015.
Pursuant to the order passed on the previous occasion, learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions, according to which, the claim of petitioner has already been processed and that the amount has already been computed and sent to the State Government. It is also stated that clearance has also been granted by the State and that further action is to be taken at the level of the PAC Headquarter.
Learned Standing Counsel extends an assurance on behalf of the respondents that entire amount due and payable shall be credited to petitioner's account within a month.
In view of the specific undertaking given on behalf of the respondents, this writ petition stands disposed off, directing the respondents to release the amount in terms of their undertaking, within a period of four weeks in the account of the petitioner.
Order Date :- 19.9.2018 Ashok Kr.