Subas Chandra Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru' Secry. And 3 ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 5861 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 37
 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1173 of 2013
 
Appellant :- Subas Chandra Singh Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secry. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- A.C. Tiwari,Achche Lal Singh Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge, it would not be necessary to detail the entire facts of the nature of the engagement of the appellant which now stands concluded by the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 29th March, 2010 in Writ Petition No. 13110 of 2007 as affirmed in Special Appeal No. 664 of 2010 decided on 3rd May, 2002. The judgment of the Division Bench narrates the entire history which is not being reproduced herein-under, but suffice it to say that after going through the entire status of the employment of the appellant, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that there was no valid appointment in favour of the appellant and therefore, the question of regularization did not arise.

The appellant had raised an issue of having worked with various officials and claimed salary. For this an observation was made that such payment of salary may be considered as any such work without salary may amount to violation of Article 23 of the Constitution of India.

The District Magistrate after having traversed the entire facts came to the conclusion that the appellant had been asked to work in the hope of an approval which was never granted in the absence of any statutory sanction or valid approval by a Competent Authority to allow the appellant to work. Therefore the same cannot be made the basis of payment of salary from the State Exchequer.

Aggrieved by the order of the District Magistrate dated 19th June, 2013, the appellant's preferred the writ petition giving rise to this appeal which has been dismissed recording the very same findings vide judgment dated 22nd July, 2013.

Having perused the material on record, we do not find any material to the contrary so as to take a different view in the matter. Consequently, there is no merit in this appeal it is hereby consigned to records. Dismissed.

Order Date :- 27.10.2017/Ishan