Allahabad High Court
Om Prakash And 16 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 18 February, 2025
Author: Abdul Moin
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10396
Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2029 of 2025
Petitioner :- Om Prakash And 16 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Agriculture Education/Research Lko. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anjali Divedi,Sachin Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prashant Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent No.1 and Shri Satyanshu Ojha, learned cousnel appearing for respondents No.2 to 5.
2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is being decided finally.
3. The instant petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 as contained in Annexure No.1 of the instant petition.
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-determine the monthly salary/payment and other benefits payable to the petitioners after allowing/adding/adjusting the wages/pay for the public holidays and weekly holidays admissible to the petitioners from month to month w.e.f. the date of their engagement in the University till March, 2019 or till the date of their regularization.
(iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant the benefits of the 7th Pay Commission w.e.f. 1.1.2016.
(iv) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the arrears of salary after re-determination of the salary/pay in terms of the prayer clause (ii) and (iii) within a fixed reasonable time.
(v) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the petitioner interest @ 18 % per annum on the arrears of payments payable to the petitioners in terms of prayer clause (iv) within a fixed reasonable time.
(vi)...
(vii)..."
4. Contention the learned counsel for the petitioners is that earlier the petitioners have approached this Court by filing Writ A No.3313 of 2024 In Re Om Prakash & 16 Ors vs State of U.P. & 4 Ors praying for re-determination of their monthly salary/payment and other benefits after allowing/adding/adjusting the wages/pay for the public holidays and weekly holidays and for being given the benefit of 7th Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.2016 as well as arrears of salary after re-determination of the salary along with interest.
5. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioners in the said petitions had confined the prayer only to the extent that no deduction be made regarding government holidays/vacations while paying the wages. Considering the aforesaid, this Court vide judgment and order dated 29.04.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition, disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to move fresh separate representations which were directed to be decided in accordance with law. However, for rest of the claims of the petitioners, it was left open for them to agitate the other prayers later on.
6. It is contended that despite the petitioners' having staked their claim for being given their wages without any deduction for holidays yet the respondents have rejected the representation vide order impugned dated 29.06.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, and no cognizance has been given to the claim of the petitioners for being given the payment for the holidays although while rejecting the representation, it has been indicated that no wages would be payable for the period the petitioners were absent.
7. The contention is that the wages for the Government holidays and working holidays would be payable to the petitioners keeping in view the judgment of this Court in a bunch of cases leading being Writ Petition No.1814(SS) of 2017 In Re Hanuman Prasad Pandey & 12 Ors vs State of U.P. & Ors, a copy of which is Annexure-7 to the petition, whereby this Court has held that no deductions for Government holidays admissible as per Negotiable Instruments Act and working holidays are to be made from the petitioners.
8. The contention is that once this Court has already laid down the law with regard to the holidays consequently the order impugned rejecting the claim of the petitioners only on the ground that the wages would not be payable on the dates when the petitioners were absent is legally untenable in the eyes of the law and thus it is prayed that the order impugned be quashed.
9. So far as the prayer for being granted the benefit of 7th pay commission with effect from 01.01.2016 is concerned, reliance has been placed on the judgment of this Court passed in Writ A No.692 of 2015 In Re Ram Kishor Yadav & Anr vs State of U.P. & Ors, decided on 21.01.2025 to contend that this Court has held that as the petitioners have been given the minimum of the regular pay scale of 6th pay commission consequently there cannot be any occasion for the respondents not to give minimum of pay scale as per the 7th Pay Commission.
10. It is contended that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment of this Court in the case of Ram Kishor Yadav (supra) consequently the petitioners are also entitled for the benefit of being given the minimum of pay scale as per the 7th pay commission.
11. Aforesaid proposition of law as enunciated by this Court in the cases of Hanuman Prasad Pandey (supra) and Ram Kishor Yadav (supra) is not disputed by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
12. Keeping in view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, is quashed. The writ petition is allowed.
13. The respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners for being given their remuneration for the period of vacation and holidays as per the law enunciated by this Court in the case of Hanuman Prasad Pandey (supra).
14. The respondents shall also consider the claim of the petitioners for being given the benefits of the minimum of pay scale as per the 7th pay commission along with arrears since 01.01.2016 particularly when the respondents-University have implemented 7th pay commission with effect from 01.01.2016.
15. Let aforesaid consideration be done within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 18.2.2025
prateek
