Allahabad High Court
Ravindra Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Energy And ... on 7 April, 2022
Author: Irshad Ali
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1333 of 2007 Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Energy And 2 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Pandey,Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- I.P. Singh,Manoj Chopra,Neerav Chitravanshi,Nirad Kumar Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.
2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of reversal dated 02.02.2007 contained as annexure-1 to the writ petition with a further prayer for issuance of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as usual on the post of Computer Programmer. The order of reversal was challenged by means of present writ petition and this court vide order dated 26.02.2007, stayed operation of the order dated 02.02.2007.
3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Junior Assistant cum Typist in erstwhile U.P. Alparthak Evam Laghu Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. on 05.12.1986. On the basis of eligibility and merit, the petitioner was granted promotion on the post of Assistant Programmer in the pay scale of Rs.515-860. The petitioner submitted his joining on 28.11.1989. He was again granted appointment on the post of Computer Programmer after being found fully fit and eligible in the interest of corporation subject to approval of Board of Directors of Corporation as well as by the State Government.
4. On 31.12.1997, the Board of Directors has accorded approval and proposal / resolution of the Board of Directors was sent to the State Government for approval. Vide letter dated 17.08.1998, the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. sent a letter to public undertakings for determination of permanent staff strength. In pursuance thereof, the Managing Director of the Corporation sent permanent staff strength to the Government for according approval. In the list, the post of Computer Programmer was shown at serial No.28.
5. The State Government issued a letter to the Managing Director requiring him to submit information regarding the post of Computer Programmer on which the petitioner is working since 06.08.1997. On 02.02.2007, the petitioner has been re-delegated from the post of Computer Programmer to the post of Assistant Programmer after about nine and half months without any rhyme and reason. The petitioner submitted representation against the illegal and arbitrary exercise of power by making reversion on the post of Assistant Programmer vide order dated 02.02.2007 and has filed the present writ petition before this Court.
6. In pursuance to an interim order granted by this Court on 26.02.2007, the petitioner has completed entire service on the post of Computer Programmer and has been paid salary. On attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 31.12.2019, however, some of his post retiral dues have not been released till date.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance to the interim order, the petitioner has completed his entire service on the post of Computer Programmer and has been paid salary, thus, non payment of certain post retiral dues is wholly illegal and arbitrary.
8. In the counter affidavit, the only ground has been taken that due to non grant of approval by the State Government, the petitioner is reverted back to the post of Assistant Programmer. No other reason has been assigned in regard to non grant of approval by the State Government, hence, the order of State Government cannot be justified in law on the ground that no reason has been assigned in not granting approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Computer Programmer.
9. Moreover, on the basis of interim order, the petitioner has continued in service and retired from the post of Computer Programmer and entire salary has been paid to him, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice that the petition be allowed in terms of the interim order.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed.
11. The impugned order dated 02.02.2007 is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to release the post retiral dues of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 7.4.2022 Adarsh K Singh