Ram Das Ii vs State Of U.P.Throu.Secy.Food And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11073 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 17
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17930 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Das Ii
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Throu.Secy.Food And Civil Supplies Lko.And Anr.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Ji Trivedi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State.

2. Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 14.05.2019 whereby the petitioner's representation has been disposed of in pursuance of the order dated 16.01.2016 passed in Writ Petition No.5573(SS) of 2018.

3. The petitioner was punished in departmental proceedings vide order dated 24.07.1999 whereby the petitioner's three increments were stopped and recovery of Rs.4,17,351/- was ordered against him.

4. The petitioner challenged the said punishment order by filing Writ Petition No.9637(SS) of 2006. The said petition was allowed to the extent that some amount was recovered from the concerned Mill/person out of Rs.4,17,350/- and only balance amount was to be recovered from the petitioner. However, so far as the order regarding stoppage of increment was concerned, no interference was given by this Court.

5. The petitioner after he was paid all retiral dues filed another writ petition claiming half amount of pay during the suspension period i.e. from 16.08.1994 to 16.11.1994 and 1/4 remaining amount was paid during the period 17.11.1994 to 28.7.1999 and the amount of suspension period during 16.08.1994 to 28.07.1999 as well as stoppage of increments during the period 2000/2001 to 2002 and annual increment along with interest thereon.

6. It is very strange that when the punishment order attained finality the petitioner moved another writ petition in the year 2018 i.e. Writ Petition No.5573(SS) of 2018 and the said writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation. Petitioner's representation has been rejected vide impugned order dated 14.05.2019 on the ground that issue has already been settled by the judgment and order dated 10.08.2017 and there was no question of granting increment to the petitioner. The petitioner has already been paid all retiral dues and he has been sanctioned pension. In view thereof, I do not find that there is any error of law or jurisdiction in deciding the representation of the petitioner. This petition being devoid of merit and substance is hereby dismissed.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)

Order Date :- 13.4.2023

prateek