HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 24 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 6948 of 2015 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Asthana Respondent :- U.P. Scheduled Castes Finance & Development Corp. Ltd. Throu Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Mani Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- P.K.Sinha Hon'ble Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. K. Sinha, who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.
With the consent of parties' Counsel, the writ petition is disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.
According to the petitioner's Counsel, petitioner was inflicted with the punishment order dated 24.8.1985, which was assailed by him before the U.P. State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow, but the claim petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 29.9.1995.
Grieved by the aforesaid judgement whereby the claim-petition was dismissed, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition no. 4723 (SS) of 1995, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 20.11.2013 and this Court quashed the order of punishment and also set-aside the judgment passed by the Tribunal. The matter was remanded to the Enquiry Officer concerned to proceed from the stage of the reply submitted by the petitioner and hold proper enquiry after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and conclude the same in accordance with law. It was further directed that the petitioner shall be reinstated forthwith but shall not be entitled for payment of back wages.
In compliance of the aforesaid judgment, the petitioner was reinstated on the post of Assistant Manager vide order dated 18.2.2014. However, vide order dated 20.3.2014, while disposing of the petitioner's representation fixed the petitioner's pay at minimum stage of the pay scale of the post of Assistant Manager treating him as new fresh appointee in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 400/-, which according to the petitioner is wholly unjust and illegal. It has also been urged by the petitioner that almost two years have elapsed from the date of judgement, but the inquiry has yet not been concluded causing serious prejudice to the petitioner.
Sri P.K.Sinha, Advocate appearing for the respondents failed to justify the action of the opposite parties in fixing the petitioner's salary at minimum stage of the pay scale of the post of Assistant Manager. He also failed to give any satisfactory explanation with regard to non-conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner despite direction of this Court.
Having gone through the material on record and the submissions advanced by the parties, it may be observed that fixing of pay of the petitioner at the minimum stage of the pay scale of post of Assistant Manager treating him as new fresh appointee in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs. 4200/- is wholly erroneous and unjustified. Infact, when the direction was made to reinstate the petitioner, the respondents should have determined his basic salary with allowances on the date of judgment with notional increments and revisions attached with the post in question. Thereafter, his salary should have fixed with non-payment of back wages. In these circumstances, the respondents are directed to re-examine the matter and fix the salary, as indicated above, and pay the same from the date of judgement to the petitioner. The opposite parties are further direction to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of three months, if possible. The petitioner is directed to co-operate in the said proceedings.
Subject to the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 14.12.2015 MH/-