Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Anil Kumar Sharma vs State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Co-Operative ... on 14 November, 2019

Author: Sudhir Agarwal

Bench: Sudhir Agarwal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 40465 of 2004
 
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Sharma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Co-Operative Societies And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Hemendra Pratap Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking mandamus commanding respondents to permit petitioner to join his duty on the post on Assistant Salesman and to pay salary with entire back wages since 11.04.1982.

3. It is contended that petitioner was appointed as Assistant Salesman at Whole-sale Central Consumer Co-operative Confectionary Store, Rasalganj, Aligarh in 1980. Petitioner was suspended in 1982 and after suspension, he has never been terminated from service. In the counter affidavit respondents have stated that charge sheet was issued to petitioner on 22.10.1991 in Criminal Case No. 2439 of 1989 under Section 408 IPC, wherein he was acquitted after trial vide judgment dated 24.05.1990. Thereagainst Criminal Revision No.479 of 1991 was filed. This Revision was dismissed on 28.10.2003.

4. in the circumstances, it is evident that petitioner has not been terminated and after suspension no departmental enquiry was conducted against him. It is also evident that suspension is not in contemplation pendency of departmental enquiry, but it was on account of a Criminal case wherein petitioner was acquitted and Revision preferred against acquittal was also dismissed. Therefore, the stand on the part of respondent that permission shall not be given to petitioner to work on the aforesaid post is illegal and unauthorized.

5. In view of the above, writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to permit petitioner to join his duty on the post of Assistant Salesman and also pass an appropriate order with regard to payment of arrears of service in accordance with law expeditiously within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Order Date :- 14.11.2019 Ashish Pd.