Allahabad High Court
Arun Kumar Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 13 September, 2023
Bench: Vikas Budhwar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177587
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12694 of 2023
Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Singh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sumit Kumar,Abhay Singh Tomar,Adarsh Bhushan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
It has been reported that the lawyers are abstaining from work.
The case of the writ petitioner as worded in the writ petition is that there is an institution by the name of Janta Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Jangipur, Ghazipur which is recognized under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, the provisions of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 stands applicable. However, the institution in question Authorized Controller has been appointed.
As per the writ petitioner he was appointed as Peon (Paricharak) class IV employee on 17.08.1985. In para 7 of the writ petition, it has been asserted that the writ petitioner was extended annual increments for satisfactory completion of 10 years and 16 years of regular service.
Pleadings further reveal that the writ petitioner was implicated in a criminal case arising out of first information report dated 23.10.2011 bearing case crime no. 638 of 2011 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur. It is further asserted in para 10 and 11 of the writ petition that the writ petitioner surrendered on 04.11.2011 before the Trial Court and thereafter bail application was rejected by the trial court and a Sessions Trial No. 238 of 2011 State of U.P. Vs. Jogi Yadav & 6 Others) came to be filed under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 I.P.C. Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur and the writ petitioner has been convicted under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 I.P.C. Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur and awarded sentence of life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- by virtue of the judgment and order of the session court dated 05.04.2014.
In para 13, it is further stated that the writ petitioner preferred criminal appeal no. 2214 of 2014 (Sanwaru alias Arun Yadav & Another Vs. State of U.P.) in which he was granted bail on 20.01.2023 and he was released on 04.02.2023. Post release from confinement the writ petitioner claims to have preferred representation dated 06.02.2023 before the second respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur with regard to joining and payment of salary.
Grievance of the writ petitioner is that despite the fact that he has been enlarged on bail but he has not been paid salary and accorded joining.
Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that the issue as to whether the writ petitioner is entitled to be accorded salary and joining depends upon various factors including the nature of offence as well as various statutory provisions which would govern the field and merely because the writ petitioner has been enlarged on bail would not be a factor for according reinstatement or payment of salary as the writ petitioner has been convicted in that regard. He, however, submits that since the writ petitioner has already represented his cause before the second respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur, thus, in his opinion the second respondent shall address to his grievance. Further submission has been made on behalf of the learned Standing Counsel that he does not propose to file any response to the writ petition.
Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them the writ petition is being disposed of without either seeking response from respondents or issuing notice to fourth respondent granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation before the second respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur along with the self attested copy of the writ petition and on the receipt of the same, the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur shall put to notice the fourth respondent and, in case, there is no Authorized Controller the Committee of Management of the institution in question and thereafter proceed to decide the claim of the writ petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order bearing in mind the following fundamental and core issues; (a) the entitlement of the writ petitioner for reinstatement and payment of salary in the wake of the Government Orders and the statutory rules governing the field; (b) the import and the impact of the conviction of the writ petitioner, pendency of the criminal appeal and enlargement of the writ petitioner on bail.
Needless to point out that the writ petitioner is being decided on the basis of the instructions of the learned Standing Counsel, thus passing of this order may not be construed to be an expression that this Court has adjudicated the matter on merits as the second respondent shall pass an order strictly in accordance with law without being obsessed and influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.
Order Date :- 13.9.2023
Rajesh
