Allahabad High Court
Smt. Asha Nigam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 24 April, 2023
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3045 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Asha Nigam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Madhyamik Shiksha, Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prakarsh Pandey,Pradeep Kumar Rai,Praveen Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite party nos. 1 to 3.
In view of the order proposed to be passed in the writ petition, issuance of notice to opposite party no.4 is dispensed with.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in primary section,which is recognized under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act 1921. The institution is receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government therefore the provisions of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 is applicable to the said institution. Initially, the said institution was not receiving aid from the State Government. The same was brought on grant in aid list in the year 1989.
The petitioner was granted appointment as an Assistant Teacher in primary section of the Inter College on 16.10.1973. On attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2003. He further submitted that the petitioner had completed 10 years of service required for the pension. Initially there was no pension for the said post. However, by means of the Government Order dated 28.01.2004, the said post was made pensionable but the said Government Order was prospective. The same was challenged before this Court and this Court by means of order dated 20.12.2012 passed in Writ A No. 17819 of 2007 (Mangali Prasad Verma versus State of U.P. and others) made it applicable on all the employees. Relying on the same, this Court had also allowed Writ A No. 36320 of 2009(Smt. Vimla Devi versus State of U.P. and others). Further this Court has also passed identical order in Writ Petition No.24346(S/S) of 2018 directing to consider the case of the petitioner in the said writ petition, in the light of the aforesaid decision passed in the case of Mangali Prasad Verma (supra).
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has made representation to the Director Secondary Education, U.P., i.e.,opposite party no.2 on 27.03.2023 claiming the benefit of pension and the judgement and order rendered in the case of Mangali Prasad(supra) but the same has not been considered till date. Therefore a prayer has been made for a direction to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the said judgement and a decision may be taken within some short stipulated period.
Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation raising all the pleas before the respondent no.1 within a period of ten days from today enclosing therewith the relevant documents and a copy of the judgment passed in the case of Mangali Prasad Verma(supra).
In case any such representation is made, the claim of the petitioner shall be considered and the representation of the petitioner shall be disposed of in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of submission of representation alongwith certified copy of this order.
It is, however, made clear that while passing the order, the respondent no.1 shall afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to the opposite party no.4-Committee of Management also.
Order Date :- 24.4.2023
nishant
