Allahabad High Court
Anil Kumar Seth & Anr. vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 13 January, 2021
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 20
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 757 of 2021
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Seth & Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas,Lko.& Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kishor Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishabh Kapoor
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State Counsel for Respondent No.1 and 2 and Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.3 and 4.
The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to implement the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission on the petitioners with effect from 01.01.2006 in accordance with provisions of the Government Order No.vay.aa-2-1314(1)dus-59 (em)/2008 dated 08.12.2008 (Annexure No.1 to the Writ Petition).
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay leave encashment to the petitioners as per the 6th Pay Commission recommendations with effect from 01.01.2006.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on the difference of amount of salary and post retirement benefits between the 5th and 6th Pay Commission recommendations with effect from 01.01.2006 till the date of actual payment.
(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay dearness allowance to the petitioners in accordance with the Government Order dated 28.05.2009 and to pay arrears thereof with interest at the rate of 10% p.a. till the date of actual payment.
(v) Award costs in favour of the petitioners and against the opposite parties and to pass such further or any such orders as may be considered just and proper in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case."
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the identical controversy has been decided by this court in bunch of writ petition vide its judgement and order dated 27.02.2020 and quashed the impugned orders which are impugned in the present writ petition and directed to pay the benefit of 6th Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as is being provided to the State Government employees. The respondents are also directed to pay the interest of 6 % from the date, they became due till the date same are paid to the petitioners.
It is further submitted that against the judgement dated 27.02.2020 passed in bunch of the writ petition, leading one is Writ Petition 11991 S/S of 2017 (Kamesh Srivastava & 5 Ors Vs. The State of U.P.), Special Appeal Defective No.276 of 2020 was preferred by the State Government of U.P., which has also been dismissed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 9.11.2020, copy of the judgement and order is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to dispute that the case of the petitioners is identical to the case of the petitioners of Writ Petition No.11991 of 2017 and squarely covered by the Judgment dated 27.02.2020.
With regard to the aforesaid prayers as made in the present with petition, similarly situated employees of the Jal Nigam who had earlier been working in the Local Self Government Engineering Department of the State Government and had subsequently been absorbed in the Jal Nigam, had filed Writ Petition No.11991 (S/S) of 2017 (Kamesh Srivastava & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors) along with connected matters. The said petition was allowed by means of judgment and order dated 27.02.2020, in turn was based on the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Harwindar Kumar vs. Chief Engineer, Karmik & Ors. reported in (2005)13 SCC 300. The operative portion of the judgment and order dated 27.02.2020 is as follows:-
"6. In the present case, only administrative orders are issued by the respondents and there is no alteration made with regard to the service conditions of the petitioners viz-a-viz the employees of the State Government. Merely by office orders change in the service conditions cannot be made. It is not disputed that benefits of the 6th Pay Commission are covered under the term 'service conditions' and, therefore, the said benefits are to be made applicable to the petitioners also from the date the same are made applicable to the State Government employees.
7. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned orders dated 30.01.2014, 22.08.2014, 14.12.2010, 29.11.2010, 12.04.2010, and 12.03.2010 are set aside and respondents are directed to pay the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as was provided to the State Government employees and further to pay the dearness allowance as is being provided to the State Government employees. Respondents are also directed to pay an interest of 6% on the aforesaid benefits from the date they became due till the date same are paid to the petitioners."
The aforesaid judgment and order dated 27.02.2020 was thereafter challenged in Special Appeal (Defective) No.276 of 2020 and has also been dismissed vide judgment and order dated 09.11.2020, a copy of the said judgment and order is taken on record.
Upon consideration of the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the present petitioners are similarly situated as the once in the writ petition of Kamesh Srivastava (supra) and are therefore squarely covered by the aforesaid judgments.
In view thereof, the petitioners being entitled for the benefits as directed in the aforesaid judgments would be covered by the said pronouncements.
Consequently, the writ petition is liable to succeed and is allowed with regard to the prayers made therein.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021
Subodh/-
