Allahabad High Court
Krishna vs State Of ... on 22 January, 2021
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 1895 of 2021
Petitioner :- Krishna
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Medical Education & Anr.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anupras Singh
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Anupras Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
2. The petitioner has rushed to this Court challenging order dated 7.1.2021 whereby he has been provided promotional grade under Modified Career Progression Scheme.
3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner was selected on the post of Sister Grade-II in pursuance to the selection proceeding by inviting applications through advertisement. After the selection, as per address available on record, information was given to the petitioner at her permanent address. In the time scheduled under the appointment order, she did not turn up to join the post. After the lapse of certain period, she approached the Department wherein as per the conditions stipulated under the appointment letter she was refused to permit joining in the institute.
Failing aggrieved, she filed Writ Petition No. 3906 (SS) of 2010 before this Court on the ground that due to fault of the Department, she could not be intimated properly and due to reason, she could not join the post within the time stipulated in the appointment letter. This Court, after hearing the parties, passed an order wherein it was directed that the claim of the petitioner shall be considered for joining on the post of Sister, Grade-II post in case the vacancy is available in the Department. Accordingly, the claim of the petitioner was considered and she was permitted to join on 12.7.2010. Since then, she is working in the Department.
In the meantime, seniority was determined of the Sister Grade-II vide order dated 13.5.2012 which was subject matter of challenge by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.15791 (SS) of 2016 which was dismissed holding that there is no illegality in finalizing the seniority list. Judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge was subject-matter of challenge in Special Appeal No.62 of 2017 which was also dismissed affirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the seniority list prepared attained finality in the eye of law. By means of the impugned order, taking into consideration the date of joining of the petitioner and not the date of appointment, seniority list has been prepared by the Selection Committee.
4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order is illegal. The petitioner could not join the post due to latches on the part of the Department, therefore, the benefit of delay in joining should be given to the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is entitled for the payment for which the Department delayed inviting him to join the post.
5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel and counsel for the respondent no.2 submit that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order impugned and it is a just and valid order. It is the petitioner who has delayed the joining and in compliance of the order passed by this Court, her claim was considered and she was permitted to join on the post. Thus, the submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is misconceived and is not acceptable in the eye of law. Next submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the challenge in regard to joining of the petitioner has been made before this Court after lapse of 11 years to which learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has raised serious objection.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has supplied copy of the judgment of the writ petition which was filed against seniority published by the Department, which is taken on record. I have also perused the said order.
7. On its perusal, it is evident that this Court after examining the provisions for determination of seniority and placement of the employee on the post of Sister, Grade-II affirmed the seniority list published by the Department and the special appeal filed against the said judgment has also been dismissed meaning thereby the dispute in regard to seniority of the petitioner had set at rest. In regard to the joining, the issue came before this Court in Writ Petition No.3906 (SS) of 2010 which was decided vide judgment and order dated 11.6.2010 wherein direction was issued to respondent no.2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for joining and pass appropriate order within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Accordingly an order was passed and petitioner was permitted to join on 12.7.2010. This Court in the order had not directed to provide benefit of delay occasioned in joining the petitioner as Sister, Grade-II, therefore the issue of joining has also attained finality in the eye of law and the same cannot be challenged after the lapse of 11 years by means of fresh petition. The benefit under the modified career progression scheme has been provided taking into consideration the date of joining of the petitioner which was determined under the order of this Court on 12.7.2010.
8. In the opinion of this Court, the order impugned does not suffer from any infirmity and illegality. Under the scheme, it has been provided that on completion of 10 years of service from the date of joining, the benefit shall be granted to the employee and the same has been followed while passing the impugned order.
9. In view of the above, this Court refuses to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition lacks merits and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.1.2021
GK Sinha
