Disposed

Jitendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2018WRIA/25663/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought writ protection against being forced into a lower pay grade after transfer. The Court directed the District Basic Education Officer to comply with the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board's order dated 23.07.2018, ensuring pay protection within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to respondent no. 3 to ensure compliance with the U.P. Basic Education Board order dated 23.07.2018 within six weeks.

Jitendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25663 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer that though they have under compulsion adopted position lower in rank to what they were enjoying at the time of transfer from one district to another district and just because they were getting a preferred district choice, they are now further forced to get lower pay admissible to the post to which they have joined.

¶7

The argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners is that though the petitioners have been forced to join lower rank only on account of the fact that the teachers of their batch have not been promoted, the respondents cannot force them to get lesser salary. They were being paid grade pay of Rs. 4600/- at the time of transfer, now they are being forced to accept pay grade of Rs. 4200/-.

¶8

This Court in a large number of writ petitions has issued direction to the concerned authorities to look into the matter of protection of pay: pay scale and pay grade in respect of such teachers who have been forced to accept lower position on account of preferred district transfer.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court to a letter-cum-order of the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad dated 23.07.2018, wherein the following directions have been issued in respect of pay protection of such teachers:-

¶10

^^mDr ds lEcU/k esa lwP; gS fd ;kphx.kkas dks Pay Protection dk ykHk fn;k tkuk pkfg,A vr% ,y-ih-lh- ¼vfUre osru izek.k i=½ ds vk/kkj ij u;s tuin esa osru dk vkxeu dj Pay Protection ds fu;eksa dk ikyu fd;k tkuk pkfg,A

¶11

pwafd inksUur izkIr f'k{kd viuh ethZ ls LFkkukUrfjr gksdj vk;s gSa ,slh fLFkfr esa LFkkukUrfjr tuin esa mudh T;s"Brk ftl in ij ;ksxnku fn;s gS@ dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;s gSa mlh in ij lcls uhps gh j[kk tk;sA

¶12

mDr ds lEcU/k eas vkidks funsZf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;kphx.kksa dks vfUre osru izek.k i= ¼,y-ih-lh-½ ds vk/kkj ij osru vkx.ku dj Pay Protection ds fu;eksa dk ikyu djrs gq, osru Hkqxrku djus dh dk;Zokgh dj ek0 mPp U;k;ky; ds vkns'k dk vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djsaA^^

¶13

However, the petitioners contend that though they have been representing the authorities but no action has been taken. In the opinion of Court, the District Basic Education Officer concerned is hide bound in law to carry out the directions issued by the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad vide his letter-cum-order dated 23.07.2018.

¶14

In view of the above, direction is issued to respondent no. 3 to ensure compliance of directives issued by Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad vide his letter-cum-order dated 23.07.2018, in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment. He shall take decision in the matter in any case positively within six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

¶15

8. The writ petition stands disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 5.12.2018 IrfanUddin

Jitendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratnesh Kumar Sagar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sheela Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Pushpa Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lakshmi Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Ramesh Chandra Verma Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Arvind Kumar Singh and 339 Others Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others