Sanjay Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 5970 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 39
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10032 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Krishna Bahadur
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Deo Dayal
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 and Sri Deo Dayal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

Nature of order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to respondent No. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was initially appointed as untrained Assistant Teacher on compassionate ground under the provisions of Government order dated 31.01.1997, vide order dated 01.07.2004 fixing pay scale of Rs. 2750/-. Pursuant to the government order dated 01.07.2004, petitioner submitted his joining on the very same day i.e. 01.07.2004 as Assistant Teacher at Maheva Junior High School, Maheva, Mughal Sarai, Chandauli. Petitioner was also granted trained pay scale w.e.f. 01.07.2009 by the order of District Basic Education Officer vide order dated 28.07.2009 after completion of five years of service as provided in Government Order dated 25.01.2005. It is further submitted that State Government has issued Government Order dated 28.03.2005 providing New Pension Scheme w.e.f. 01.04.2005 i.e. contributory pension scheme. In the said scheme, it is also provided that employees who have not completed 10 years of service on 01.04.2005 may also opt. Petitioner has not completed 10 years of service on 01.04.2005 and he was willing to continue with Old Pension Scheme, but respondent No. 3 has stopped deducting his GPF and placed the petitioner under New Pension Scheme implemented by State Government vide order dated 28.03.2005. For redressal of his grievance, petitioner has submitted a representation dated 08.04.2019 to respondent No. 2, but till date the same has not been decided. Lastly, it is submitted that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent No. 2 to consider the representation of petitioner and decide the same within the time fixed by the Court for which learned counsel for the respondents have no objection.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner and take decision strictly in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is directed to annexe the photocopy of representation dated 08.04.2019 along with certified copy of this order.

It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merit. It is upon the respondent no. 2 to pass order after considering the relevant rules as well as government orders occupying the field.

Order Date :- 9.7.2019

Sartaj