Allahabad High Court
Uccha Shikshit Yuva Kalyan Samiti Thru ... vs R.K. Mittal Secretary Higher Education ... on 20 November, 2019
Author: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Court No. - 5 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3632 of 2007 Applicant :- Uccha Shikshit Yuva Kalyan Samiti Thru Vice President And Anr Opposite Party :- R.K. Mittal Secretary Higher Education And Another Counsel for Applicant :- P.S.Baghel, Amit Saxena,B.N.Chaturvedi,D.Srivastava,Gautam Baghel,P.K. Rai,Raj Mohan Saggi,S.S.Misra,Smt.Arti Raje Counsel for Opposite Party :- S.C. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
1. Heard Smt. Arti Raje, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
2. The Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.37014 of 1999 (Uccha Shikshit Yuva Kalyan Samiti And Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and another), was disposed of by order dated 12.04.2002, as under :-
"Heard counsel for the parties.
The facts of the case are covered by the Division Bench decision of this court in writ petition No.4812 of 1988 Km. Renu Tiwari Vs. The Director, Higher Education decided on 4.10.1996. Against that order an S.L.P. Has been rejected by the Supreme Court vide Annexure 5 to the petition.
Following the aforesaid decision this petition is allowed on the same terms and conditions as in Renue Tiwari's case (supra)."
3. The aforesaid writ petition of the applicants was disposed of in terms of the order dated 04.10.1996, in writ petition No.4812 of 1988 (Km. Renu Tiwari and others Vs. Director of Higher Education and others). The order dated 04.10.1996 in Km. Renu Tiwari (supra) is reproduced below:-
"In the premise we are of the view that the Government Order dated 22.7.1986 is liable to be quashed and the petitioners are entitled atleast the minimum pay scale in the regular pay scale for lecturer teaching in same college. According to the petitioners it is scale of pay of Rs.2200-4000/-. In the circumstances, we direct that the petitioners be paid salary instead of per lecturer equivalent to Rs.15/-, if not already enhanced, in the minimum of the scale of pay. In case the pay scale has been announced, then salary shall be paid in the enhanced pay scale. We further provide that the case of the petitioners for regularisation be considered in the light of observation made above and in accordance with law.
The writ petition is allowed in terms mentioned above. Parties to bear their own cost."
4. The present contempt application has been filed by the applicants alleging that the order of the Writ Court dated 12.04.2002 in Writ No.37014 of 1999, which was disposed of in terms of the order in the case of Km. Renu Tiwari (supra); has not been complied with by the respondents.
5. The order in the case of Km. Renu Tiwari (supra) is in two parts. The first part is with respect to payment of salary in the minimum of the pay scale in the regular pay scale for lecturer teaching in the same college. The second part is a direction to the authorities to consider regularisation.
6. In paragraph Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the affidavit of Dr. Vandana Sharma, Director, Higher Education U.P., Allahabad, dated 13.11.2019, it has been stated as under:-
"5. That this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 10.10.1996 in writ petition no. 4812 of 1988 Km. Renu Tiwari Vs. Director, Higher Education and others was pleased to allow the writ petition entitling petitioners at least minimum pay scale in the regular pay scale for lecturers teaching in same college and consideration of regularization of petitioner in accordance with law.
6. That in compliance to the order dated 12.4.2002 passed in writ petition no. 37014 of 1999 Uccha Shikshit Yuva Kalyan Samiti and others Vs. State of U.P. and others petitioners of the writ petition vide order dated 21.11.2007 were accorded salary in the minimum of the pay scale applicable to lecturer of degree college from date of issue of order by the Hon'ble Court.
7. That for the regularization of honorarium lecturers appointed in terms of G.O. dated 7.4.1998 Section 31-E was introduced in the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980 by Third Amendment Act, 2006 (U.P. Act No. 42 of 2006).
8. That regularization of twelve member of the Uchcha Shikshit Yuva Kalyan Samiti working as honorarium lecturer and eligible in terms of Section 31-E of the U.P. Higher Education Service Commission Act, 1980 as amended vide Amendment Act No. 22 of 2014 on 26.12.2014 and Amendment Act No. 38 of 2018 on 10.9.2018 have been made vide order dated as mentioned corresponding to the names stated below:-
Name of Honorarium lecturers Date of regularization i Dr. Shuyash Shukla 18.5.2017 ii Dr. Udarata 18.5.2017 iii Dr. Kiran Singh 18.5.2017 iv Dr. Sunil Kumar 18.5.2017 v Dr. Rashmi Mishra 18.5.2017 vi Dr. Kalpana Gaurh 13.1.2018 vii Dr.Ranjana Agrawal 18.5.2017 viii Dr.Geetika Nagar 18.5.2017 ix Dr. Ravindra Nath Shukla 18.5.2017 x Dr. Krishna Kumar Mishra 18.5.2017 xi Dr. Mithilesh kumari 18.5.2017 xii Dr.R.N. Singh
07.3.2019 The photocopy of regularization orders of 12 honorarium lecturers mentioned above are jointly marked and annexed as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit.
9. That in view of the facts stated above it is most humbly submitted that this Hon'ble Court may most graciously be pleased to take the instant affidavit on record and dismiss the contempt application as the order dated 12.4.2002 passed by this Hon'ble Court in writ petition no. 37014 of 1999 has been complied with."
7. In paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the affidavit dated 13.11.2019, the applicants have stated as under:-
"3. That, the services of the members of applicant organization were reqularised vide Order No. Degree-Arth-1(Vi.Ni.)/577-583/2017-18 dated 18.5.2017 issued by the Director of Higher Education with immediate effect i.e. from the date of issuance of the said order. A true copy of the order dated 18.5.2017, is being filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE No.A-01 to this affidavit.
4. That, it is significant to mention here that writ petitioner of the applicants was allowed in terms of the order passed by this Court dated 4.10.1996 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4812 of 1998 (Km. Renu Tiwari v. The Director, High Education). In the matter of Km. Renu Tiwari the candidates have been given benefit of absorption/regularization from the date of judgment dated 4.10.1996, whereas in the applicant's matter they have been denied benefit from the date of judgment. A true copy of the order dated 16.4.2004 passed in the matter Km. Renue Tiwari, is being filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE No.A-02 to this affidavit."
8. From the facts as briefly noted above, it is clear that the applicants admit that the order of the Writ Court dated 12.04.2002 including the two directions given in the order of the Writ Court in the case of Km. Renu Tiwari (supra) have been complied with. Now the only grievance of the applicants is that their regularisation should be made from the date of the order of the Writ Court i.e. 12.04.2002.
9. Thus grievance of the applicants is beyond the scope of the contempt application inasmuch as the Writ Court by Order dated 12.04.2002 read with the order in the case of Km. Renu Tiwari (supra) has merely directed for consideration of the regularisation. There is no positive order by the Writ Court for reqularisation of the petitioners from any specific date or from the date of the order.
10. In view of the aforesaid, I find that the order of the Writ Court has been fully complied with by the opposite parties.
11. In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any good reason to proceed further in this contempt petition.
12. Consequently, the contempt application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.11.2019/vkg