Mahaveer Prasad Dihuliya vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 428 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4483 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Mahaveer Prasad Dihuliya
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahabir Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandra Prakash Awasthi
 

 
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Mahabir Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Chandra Prakash Awasthi, learned counsel for the contesting respondent no. 3 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 & 2.

By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for following relief as substantial relief:

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to relies the retiral dues, to the petitioner with all services consequences as well as Services rendred as daily wager from 02.03.1989 till the date of Regularization is to be counted with Regular service for the purposes of Grant of Retiral dues, with interest as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to make payment of post retirement dues of the petitioner who has retired way back on 30.06.2017.

The grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner had been in service of the respondent since 02.03.1989 but his services came to be regularized only on 10.11.2011.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of pronouncement of law on the question of consideration of period spent as daily wager, fixed pay employee or temporary employee to be counted towards the pensionable service.

It appears from the records that the petitioner has already represented the matter to the respondent no. 3.

Sri Chandra Prakash Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 submits that he has no objection in the event this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to look into and consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law.

In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that respondent no. 3 shall consider the grievance of the petitioner raised in his representation and decide the same in the light of observations of Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Prem Singh v. State of U.P. (2019) 10 SCC 516, and the judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others (Writ-A No. 5817 of 2020) decided on 08.10.2021 and the recent judgment of this Bench in Awadhesh Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. and 4 others in Writ - A No. 2449 of 2022 decided on 04.03.2022, however, strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Needless to add that the order to be passed by the competent authority, as directed herein above, shall be reasoned and speaking one.

Order Date :- 4.4.2022

IrfanUddin