Allahabad High Court
Shashi Kumar Lal vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 3 March, 2020
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 30 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3408 of 2020 Petitioner :- Shashi Kumar Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhola Nath Yadav,Abhishek Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
The petitioner had retired from the post of Lekhpal on 31.1.2020. He is not being given the benefit of pension scheme as according to the respondents, he had not completed the requisite period of qualifying service. The admitted fact is that the initial appointment of the petitioner in 1978 was on substantive post of Lekhpal as per the provisions of Lekhpal Service Rules, 1958. However, he was not having training from Lekhpal Training School and was, thus, being treated as untrained Lekhpal. The Board of Revenue issued an order dated 29th March, 2006 whereunder, untrained Lekhpals who had completed ten years of satisfactory service, were entitled to undergo three months training at the Lekhpal Training School.
The case of the petitioner is that he had completed the training successfully followed by order of regularisation on his service. The grievance is that the services rendered by the petitioner prior to his regularisation is not being counted, but which if counted, would entitle him to the benefit of pension scheme.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgement by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-A No. 57515 of 2016 Ram Narayan RamVs State of U.P. And others in support of his contention wherein it was held that the services rendered by a temporary untrained Lekhpal followed by regularisation of service, would be entitle him to the benefit of services rendered prior to his regularisation. It is urged that the respondents be directed to consider his claim in the light of the said judgement.
Learned Standing Counsel states that the claim shall be considered expeditiously.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with certified copy of this order before the respondent no.4, who shall in that event, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Ram Narayan Ram (supra) expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 3.3.2020 Puspendra