Allahabad High Court
Sri Krishna Agarwal vs State Of U.P.& Another on 9 September, 2015
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62290 of 2013
Petitioner :- Sri Krishna Agarwal
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to pay the salary since 12.7.1984 to 31.8.1994 and other dues with 12% interest.
It appears from the record that the petitioner was appointed on 12.9.1959 as Senior Stenographer in the Department of Technical Education. Thereafter, he was promoted on ad-hoc basis to the post of Senior Inspector of Account in the department by means of order dated 27.3.1974. Being aggrieved against the order of transfer/reversion to the post of Stenographer, the petitioner had preferred a Writ Petition No.1056 of 1988 (Krishna Agrawal vs. State of UP & ors) and this Court vide an order dated 10.5.1993 had allowed the writ petition with following directions:-
"In view of what has been indicated hereinabove the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. A writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 5.1.82, 7.7.84, 12.7.84 and 8.12.1987 contained in Annexures-3,4,5 and 7 respectively to the writ petition, is issued. A writ in the nature of mandamus is also issued commanding the opposite parties to consider the regularization of the services of the petitioner on the post of Senior Inspector of Accounts-now known as Senior Auditor with effect from the date he was reverted on the post of Stenographer and to pay him the difference of salary and all other consequential benefits for which he would have been entitled had he not been reverted and pass orders within three weeks from the date of presentation of the order. No order is made as to costs."
Aggrieved with the said order, the respondents had also preferred Special Appeal No.60 (S/B) of 1995, which was dismissed on 11.8.1996. Against the said judgment the State of UP filed Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.15067 of 1994 and the same was dismissed vide an order dated 14.11.1994. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.8.1994. Finally the Director, Technical Eduction, U.P. had taken a decision in the matter on 13.7.1996 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) by which a direction was issued for payment of certain amount towards the arrears of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of a categorical direction, the petitioner has not been paid. In this regard, he has already moved a detailed representation on 30.1.2013, which is still pending consideration.
Learned counsel for the petitioner precisely submits that the petitioner's representation dated 30.1.2013 may be decided expeditiously.
Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that in case the representation is still pending and has not been disposed of, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously.
In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent no.2 to look into the grievance of the petitioner for payment of arrears of salary in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.
Order Date :- 9.9.2015
RKP
(Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
