Allahabad High Court
Smt. Neetu Singh Patel vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 26 July, 2023
Bench: Vikas Budhwar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:150554
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12042 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Neetu Singh Patel
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mritunjay Mohan Sahai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Prakash Rai
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Mritunjay Mohan Sahai, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Saurabh, learned Standing Counsel appears for the State-respondent no.1 and Sri S.P. Rai, learned counsel appears for respondent nos.2 to 4.
The case of the writ petitioner is that pursuant to the scheme floated by State Government on 04.02.2000 and 13.03.2020, the appointments made on contractual basis by the University in question, wherein they were enjoined to give minimum of the pay scale to the contractual appointees. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the husband of the writ petitioner, namely, Late Dharmendra Kumar Patel was engaged on contractual basis on 06.10.2008 to teach Generalism in self finance course and he was issued appreciation letter. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the husband of the writ petitioner was paid salary since June, 2020 as stated that in the para 17 of the writ petition but salary from 01.07.2020 till 22.11.2020 has not been paid despite the fact that the writ petitioner needs sympathetic consideration as her husband died on 11.04.2021 leaving behind the petitioner, the legal heirs being the children.
Learned counsel for the writ petitioner relies upon the judgment in Writ - A No.14185 of 2020 (Dr. Manohar Lal and 36 others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) along with other writ petitions decided on 23.09.2021 as well as the order passed in Special Appeal No.189 of 2022 along with connected writ petitions which came to be dismissed on 29.03.2022 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.25364 of 2022 decided on 29.03.2022 so as to contend that in the said judgment a positive direction was being given to the University to treat the petitioners who had challenged the action of the respondents in service till the satisfactory discharge of their duties until the continuance of self finance scheme which ever is earlier and shall be paid salary payable to other teachers. While referring to the para 50 of the said judgment, it is further contended that in the said case also the salary was stopped on 30.06.2020.
Prayer in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to make payment of salary of the writ petitioner from 01.07.2020 till 22.11.2020.
Sri Rai, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 4, on the other hand, submits that the question as to whether the writ petitioner is entitled to be paid salary as per the judgment in the case of Dr. Manohar Lal (supra) needs to be ascertained at the level of the fourth respondent, namely, Vice Chancellor, Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi, who shall consider the claim of the writ petitioner, within a period of two months.
Considering the submissions of rival parties as well as stand taken by the parties, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the fourth respondent by filing the comprehensive representation along with self attested copy of the writ petition and on receipt of the same, the fourth respondent shall decide the claim of the writ petitioner after summoning the record and verifying the same and bearing in mind the judgment in the case of Dr. Manohar Lal (supra) which according to the writ petitioner applies in his case.
In case, the fourth respondent is of the opinion that certain inputs are require from the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner may be informed in writing so as to enable him to submit the inputs.
In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
It is open to the writ petitioner to raise all the claims with regard to restraining the husband of the petitioner for not being accorded joining because of no fault of his and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the University shall also consider that aspect of the matter.
Order Date :- 26.7.2023
Atul
