Ram Nath Yadav And 2 Others vs State Of U P And 3 Otherss
2023 Latest Caselaw 9676 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8929 of 2021
 
Petitioner :- Ram Nath Yadav And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Otherss
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jiya Lal Patel,G.D. Mishra,Gaurav Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.

Heard counsel for the parties.

Petitioners have approached this Court claiming that initially they were working as Tube Well Operator with the Allahabad Mandal Nigam Limited as permanent employee. It was fully owned government company of State of U.P. which was dissolved by the State Government. The State Government came out with the policy decision vide Government order dated 11.11.1993 stating that employees of the said Nigam shall be absorbed in Government Services as per terms and conditions specified therein. Thus, petitioners were absorbed. Petitioner no.1 was appointed on the post of Patravahak in pursuance of appointment letter dated 04.09.2002 and petitioner nos.2 and 3 by appointment letter dated 03.03.2000, were also appointed on post of Patravahak in Allahabad.

Learned counsel for petitioner states that petitioners are entitled for all retirement benefits, pension, gratuity counting the services rendered by the petitioners for Allahabad Mandal Nigam Limited, Allahabad. He submits that the controversy is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 12.12.2017 passed in Writ-A No.58438 of 2015 (Kamta Prasad Kannaujiya Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others). The concluding paragraph of the said judgment reads:

"Accordingly, the impugned order 9.9.2015 is quashed and the respondent no. 1 is directed to add the services rendered by the petitioner in the Allahabad Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. from 15.7.1977 till 6.3.2005 in the service rendered by him in Deen Dayal Upadhyay Rajya Gramya Vikas Sansthan, Lucknow and to determine the pension payable to the petitioner accordingly within a period of three months.

The writ petition is allowed."

Learned standing counsel also could not dispute that the matter is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment.

Hence, the order dated 09.02.2021 is quashed.

Respondent no.1 is directed to add the services rendered by the petitioners in the Allahabad Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd., Allahabad and to determine the pension payable to the petitioners accordingly within a period of three months.

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is allowed.

[Vivek Chaudhary J.]

Order Date :- 3.4.2023/-Amit K-