Tarkeshwar Pathak vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5937 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7954 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Tarkeshwar Pathak
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sunil Kumar Misra
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri Sunil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5.

Present petition has been filed with following reliefs;

"(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature certiorari to quash the impugned order of punishment dated 3.1.2005 and 24.5.2006, to the extent the petitioner has been given fresh chance of service with stoppage of three years wage increment without future effect, forfeited of entire wages/ mandatory benefits."

Sri Sunil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5 raised preliminary objection and submitted that against the impugned order dated 3.1.2005 as well as appellate order dated 24.5.2006, petitioner has approached State Public Services Tribunal by filing Claim Petition No. 1166 of 2006, which was dismissed vide order dated 27.4.2015. Thereafter, he has filed Review Petition No. 94 of 2015 before Tribunal in Claim Petition No. 1116 of 2006, which was also rejected vide order dated 27.9.2018. Thereafter, petitioner was retired from service and file another Claim Petition No. 1102 of 2019 with relief to count his earlier service rendered by him as conductor in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, which was rejected vide order dated 24.08.2021 on the ground that Claim Petition is not maintainable before this Tribunal in light of judgment of Division Bench of Hon'ble High Court passed in Writ A No. 2742 of 2021. He next submitted that there is two round of litigations; first litigation attained finality after dismissal of Review Petition and thereafter, the second round of litigation is started after retirement for counting his service rendered by him as Conductor. So far as liberty given to petitioner by Tribunal vide order dated 24.8.2021 pertains to file petition for counting his earlier service rendered by him as Conductor in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, it cannot be extended for challenging the impugned order dated 3.1.2005 as well as appellate order dated 24.5.2006, which was affirmed by Tribunal vide orders dated 27.04.2015 and 27.09.2018. Therefore, this petition is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

Under such facts of the case, petition lacks merit and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 5.7.2022

Arvind