Allahabad High Court
Indra Nath Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 4 April, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2620 of 2023
Petitioner :- Indra Nath Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Transport Deptt. Civil Sectt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Mani Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Shri Manish Mani Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the Opposite Parties to give promotion to the Petitioner on the post of Assistant Regional Transport Officer, alongwith all service benefits in terms of judgment and order dated 23.05.2006 passed in Writ Petition No.637 of 1997 affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 08.01.2015 from 18.07.2003 when junior most person to the Petitioner namely Santosh Kumar Singh has been promoted, as early as possible, in the interest of justice.
II. Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the Petitioner."
The petitioner who was working in Agra Mandal Vikas Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Nigam Limited") was retrenched on 08.01.1994 from the said Nigam Limited. Thereafter, he was absorbed in Transport Department and was given the post of Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical).
The petitioner filed a writ petition bearing Writ Petition No.637 (S/S) of 1997 praying for a writ of mandamus for protection of his last drawn pay. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 23.05.2006. The operative portion of the said judgment and order dated 23.05.2006 would read as under:-
"Under the circumstances, a writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to give the appointment to the Petitioners on the post of Regional Inspector (Technical) with effect from the date their absorption in the transport department protecting their last pay as drawn in the earlier department in terms of the Government order dated 11.11.1993. It is further provided that the Petitioners shall also be entitled for other consequential benefits."
Against the said judgment and order dated 23.05.2006, the State Government filed Special Appeal No.811 of 2006 before a Division Bench of this Court.
The Division Bench of this Court set aside the order dated 23.05.2006 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.637 (S/S) of 1997 and it was directed that the petitioner would be allowed to continue on the post of Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical) on which he was absorbed after he was retrenched from the Nigam Limited. It was further directed that the case of the petitioner and other similarly situated employees would be considered for promotion if they would be eligible and, if any, promotions were to be made.
Thereafter, the petitioner and other aggrieved employees filed S.L.P. No.17051 of 2009 (Azahrul Hasan and Others vs. State of U.P. and Others) which was converted to Civil Appeal No.183 of 2015 before the Supreme Court against the judgment and order dated 06.05.2009 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.811 of 2006. The Supreme Court allowed the Civil Appeal No.183 of 2015 vide judgment and order dated 08.01.2015 and set aside the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court. The State authorities were directed to extend all the benefits of which the petitioner and others were entitled in law pursuant to the absorption order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The State-respondents preferred a Review Petition No.2848 of 2016 before the Supreme Court in the aforesaid Civil Appeal No.183 of 2015, which came to be dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 21.07.2016.
The petitioner got retired on 31.12.2012. The petitioner was given the benefit of the judgment and order passed by the Supreme Court, in compliance of which he was treated to have been absorbed on the post of Regional Inspector (Technical) vide order dated 18.01.2016 passed by Transport Commissioner.
The petitioner had filed a contempt petition bearing Contempt Petition No.702 of 2016, however, taking note of the fact that vide order dated 18.01.2016, the petitioner was absorbed/appointed on the post of Regional Inspector (Technical), the said contempt petition was dismissed having been rendered infructuous.
The petitioner thereafter, filed a recall application bearing Recall Application No.73443 of 2016 seeking recall of the order dated 01.08.2016, however the said recall application was dismissed vide order dated 04.08.2016.
After dismissal of the contempt petition and recall application as mentioned above, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition after seven years seeking same reliefs which were sought earlier in the writ petition filed in 1997. The petitioner is claiming that junior to him was promoted in the year 2014. This Court has perused the order dated 23.05.2019 in respect of one Shri Qamrul Waheed Khan who was granted promotion to the post of Assistant Regional Transport Officer with effect from the date of his junior was promoted i.e. on 26.09.2014. Admittedly, the petitioner cannot claim parity with the order dated 23.05.2019 inasmuch as the petitioner was not in service when the order dated 23.05.2019 in respect of Shri Qamrul Waheed Khan was passed vide which he was promoted to the post of Assistant Regional Transport Officer with effect from 26.09.2014 when junior to Shri Qamrul Waheed Khan was promoted.
Moreover, the petitioner had approached this Court after eleven years of his retirement and seven years from the date when his contempt petition was dismissed.
In view of above, I find no substance in the present petition which is liable to be dismissed on the ground of vast delay and laches inasmuch as on merit as well.
Accordingly, the present petition is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.4.2023
Piyush/-
