Sri Suraj Singh vs Managing Director
2024 Latest Caselaw 1287 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Sri Suraj Singh vs Managing Director on 1 July, 2024

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                  Writ Petition (S/S) No.1127 of 2024

Sri Suraj Singh                                         ........Petitioner
                                Versus

Managing Director, Uttarakhand Transport Corporation
and others                                        .....Respondents

Presence:-
      Mr. Gulshan Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ganesh
      Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioners.
      Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents, appeared
      through video conferencing.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought indulgence of this Court for quashing the impugned pay fixation order dated 24.07.2021, and the recovery order dated 01.09.2021 and further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to release his leave encashment and Gratuity amount on the basis of his last drawn salary and to refund the entire amount i.e.Rs.3,81,183/- deducted/recovered from the amount of his Gratuity.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Brief facts in nutshell are that petitioner was appointed as Conductor with the respondents-department in the year 1988. He was granted promotion on the post of Senior Clerk and after attaining the age of superannuation retired on 31.12.2019. After the retirement of petitioner, respondent no.3-Regional Manager passed office order, whereby an amount of Rs.11,55,060/- as gratuity was sanctioned to petitioner, but, the same was not paid to him despite many requests. He moved various representations, but no heed was given to him. Thereafter, on 01.09.2021 respondent no.3- Regional Manager (operation), Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, Nainital

Region, Kathgodam passed an order reducing gratuity amount as Rs.10,25,325/- and a recovery of Rs.3,81,183/- as excess payment against ACP was made from petitioner and he shall be entitled to Rs.1,73,599/- against his gratuity amount. Petitioner submitted that once the respondent granted Selection Grade/ACP to him by considering the adverse entries, thereafter, cannot deny for 2nd ACP or 3rd ACP on the ground of same adverse entries, which was already considered for granting 1st ACP. On 09.03.2019, a Government Order was issued clarifying therein that in the matter of any employee, the benefit of ACP has been sanctioned prior to the date 01.09.2008 being covered under any earlier provisions under Government Order dated 08.03.2011, such matter shall not reopen. Petitioner was granted benefit of selection grade/promotional pay scale/ACP prior to the date 01.09.2008; therefore, his matter should not be reopened. Hence, this petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy has been set at rest by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 14.06.2022 passed in WPSS No.1593 of 2021 Balam Singh Aswal Vs. Managing Director and Others and Batch of writ petitions, which are subsequently affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 04.04.2024 in Special Appeal No.245 of 2022, Managing Director, Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, Dehradun & Others Vs. Ashok Kumar Saxena, and Batch of Special Appeals.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents has also submitted that the present matter is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 14.06.2022, which was affirmed in Special Appeals as referred above by learned counsel for the petitioners vide judgment dated 04.04.2024.

6. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment and order dated 14.06.2022 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No.1593 of 2021 Balam Singh Aswal Vs. Managing Director and Others and Batch, which is affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.245 of 2022 Managing Director, Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, Dehradun & Others Vs. Ashok Kumar Saxena and Batch, vide judgment dated 04.04.2024. The case of the petitioner shall abide by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 14.06.2022, which is later on affirmed vide judgment dated 04.04.2024 in Special Appeals as stated above.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 01.07.2024 PN