Allahabad High Court
Rajiv Sinha & Ors. vs State Of ... on 2 February, 2021
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 2885 of 2021
Petitioner :- Rajiv Sinha & Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Social Welfare & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Naresh Chandra Mehrotra
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard Sri Vinay Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri N.C. Mehrotra, learned counsel fore respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. The controversy involved in the present writ petition is that the petitioners are retired employees of respondent - corporation on different dates shown in the chart referred in paragraph-5 to the writ petition. They claimed benefit of payment on the basis of 7th pay commission.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that similar controversy in regard to benefit of payment in pursuance to 7th pay commission came for consideration before this court in Writ Petition No.20412 (S/S) of 2020; Ajay Kumar Srivastava Vs. U.P. State Const. & Infra. Devp. Corp. Ltd., thru M.D. & ors., wherein after examining the material, this court allowed the petition vide judgment and order dated 02.12.2020 with a direction to the Managing Director, U.P. State Construction and Infrastructure Development Corporation, Lucknow to pass orders in regard to payment of benefit provided under the government order and standing order issued by the State Government as well as by the respondent - corporation.
4. He next submitted that the judgment and order passed by this court was challenged in Special Appeal Defective No.4 of 2021, wherein the judgment and order passed by learned single judge was affirmed by dismissing the special appeal. He further submitted that the petitioners have approached to the respondent - corporation to provide benefit as per government order and standing order but the respondents are sitting tight over the matter and have not taken decision on the request made by the petitioners. He requested that in case direction is issued to the respondent No.2 to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of judgment and order passed by this court and annexed as annexure-5 & 6 to the petition, ends of justice would be met.
5. On the other hand, learned standing counsel and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that in case the petitioners file a comprehensive representation ventilating all their grievances supported by government orders and standing orders, the same shall be considered and appropriate reasoned and speaking order shall be passed within a reasonable period.
6. I have heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
7. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh comprehensive representation in regard to claim setup in the writ petition along with copy of the writ petition before respondent No.2 within ten days from today. In case such a representation is preferred, the respondent No.2 shall consider the same and shall pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order taking into consideration the judgments referred hereinabove within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 2.2.2021
Adarsh K Singh
