Uttarakhand High Court
Vijay Singh Pundir vs Government Of Uttarakhand & Others on 21 March, 2024
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No.708 of 2023
Vijay Singh Pundir ........Petitioner
Versus
Government of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Presence:-
Mr. Tribhuwan Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Mr.
A.K. Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Mr. Bhupendra Singh Koranga, learned Brief Holder for
the State of Uttarakhand.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
According to learned counsel for the petitioner,
petitioner was the employee in Basic Education Board,
Uttar Pradesh, which was created under Basic Education
Act, 1972.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner was appointed on 27.12.1991. He was
thereafter promoted to the post of Junior Assistant on
20.04.2001 and thereafter to the post of Senior Assistant
on 30.05.2022, and finally retired on attaining the age of
superannuation on 30.06.2022. Upon reorganization of
the State, Legislature enacted Uttaranchal School
Education Act, 2006 (for short, the Act). Section 58 of the
Act provided that teachers and other employees of Basic
Shiksha Parishad shall stand transferred to the State
Government, or in other words, they become employees
of State Government.
3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner,
in terms of Section 58, a Government Order was issued
on 24.06.2006 which provides that all employees,
teaching or non teaching U.P. Basic Education Board,
shall stand provincialized w.e.f. 22.04.2006.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that although
his status was changed from employees of Basic
Education Board to that of Government servant by
Legislative Act, but the petitioner has been denied benefit
of past service rendered in Basic Education Board in the
matter of seniority, A.C.P. and other service benefits. The
petitioner then approached this Court by way of filing
WPSS No.1636 of 2022 which was disposed of by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated
31.08.2022 permitting the petitioner to move a
representation to the District Education Officer
(Elementary) Dehradun which was directed to be decided
within three months from the date of its receipt. The
representation filed by the petitioner was rejected by the
respondent no.2 vide order dated 04.02.2023 which is
also impugned in this writ petition.
5. It is fairly submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the issue in-question is no longer res
integra and is squarely covered by a judgment rendered
by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No. 786 of
2016 decided on 31.05.2017. This fact has also been
admitted by the State Counsel.
6. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. The
order dated 04.02.2023, annexure-6, passed by
respondent no.2 is set-aside. At the same time, a writ of
mandamus is hereby issued commanding the
respondents to take a decision regarding petitioner's
claim for seniority and other consequential benefits by
passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of
eight weeks' from the date of receipt of certified copy of
this order and further to pay all consequential benefits to
the petitioners.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed
of accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
21.03.2024
R.dang
