Narender Singh vs State Of U.P.Thru ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3998 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 36388 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Narender Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Vocational Edu.Skill Dev. And Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Desh Deepak Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to take into account the past services of the petitioner rendered in the Auto Tractors Ltd., Pratapgarh, for the purpose of qualifying them to post-retiral benefits.

Briefly stated facts are that petitioner was appointed as semi skilled (A) on 15.11.1980 in Auto Tractors Ltd. at Pratapgarh, an undertaking of State Government. Petitioner was given promotion on the post of Semi Skilled in basic pay of Rs. 580/- . Since petitioner's industry was declared as sick and was closed on 20.11.1990, entire Staff was compelled to be retrenched.

State Government had taken a decision to absorb the retrenched employees. Petitioner was absorbed as Anudeshak vide letter dated 27.8.1994, on the lower pay scale. Petitioner joined on the said post, performed his duties and retired on 31.12.2017 after attaining the age of superannuation. However, no steps were taken to give retiral benefits to the petitioner.

Controversy is squarely covered by decision of a Division Bench of this Court given in the case of Hridayesh Dayal Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. And others [Writ Petition No. 410 of 2010 (SB)]. In Para 21 of the judgment it is said that with regard to the pay scale and the actual pay to which petitioner was entitled could have been sanctioned as personal pay to protect the last salary drawn. Division Bench has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court given in the case of Chittaranjan Sharma and others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another [1996(3) ESC 622 (SC)] wherein direction to maintain the pay scales and to make adjustment and absorption, was found to be correct. Division Bench took the view that past service of the petitioner are liable to be considered for time bound pay scales and other benefits. SLP against the order of Division Bench was dismissed.

In the case of Chandra Bhushan Pathak Vs. State of U.P. And others [Writ Petition No. 8568 of 2010(SS)], this Court was of the view that respondents are found to give all the consequential benefits admissible to the petitioner by taking into account the services rendered in M/s Auto Tractors Limited.

The learned standing counsel does not dispute the aforesaid legal position.

In view of the above, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are directed to give all the consequential benefits taking into account the service rendered by the petitioner in Auto Tractors Ltd., Pratapgarh for the purpose of retiral benefits.

[Vivek Chaudhary J.]

Order Date :- 8.2.2023

-Amit K-