Disposed

Pitambar Dutt Sharma v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2018WRIA/54443/2004

Download

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54443 of 2004…

What the court decided

AI extract

Pitambar Dutt Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Others — Allahabad HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54443 of 2004

¶3

Petitioner :- Pitambar Dutt Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Khalil Ahmad Ansari,Chandravir Singh Raghuvan,Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary rejoinder affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶6

The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶7

"issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 and 3 to release the petitioner's regular salary by month to month including all arrears as and when it falls due without any delay or direction."

¶8

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner's salary payment for the period June, 2005 onward has been restored. Therefore, the relief sought in the present writ petition is for the salary payment for the period September, 2004 to May, 2005.

¶9

Briefly, it is the admitted case of the petitioner that he had been earlier appointed as a Tube Well Operator by respondent no.3 that is Sahayak Abhiyanta, Chaturth Nalkoop Up Khand, Dhampur, District- Bijnor. Subsequently, under the Government Order, the services of the petitioner were sought to be transferred by the Block Development Officer-respondent no.2 on the post of Gram Panchayat Vikas Adhikari, Shahpur Jamal. However, before the petitioner could join, on 06.09.2004, the aforesaid order was amended and the petitioner was transferred to Bhawanipur. It is thereafter that dispute had arisen between the parties.

¶10

While the petitioner claims that he had joined at Bhawanipur and had worked at that place in terms of the transfer order and in proof thereof, the petitioner has annexed copies of certain certificates issued by the Gram Pradhan, Bhawanipur, the respondent in their counter affidavit appear to deny the fact on the reasoning that the petitioner was not relieved from his earlier posting as Tube Well Operator, Alampur Gawda Shahpur Jamal and that they further appear to submit that there does not exist any evidence of the petitioner having discharged his duties at the transferred place of posting namely Bhawanipur.

¶11

Keeping in mind, the factual nature of the matter, no useful purpose would be served in making final adjudication of the claim made by the petitioner.

¶12

Without making any observation as to merits, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following terms:

¶13

(i) the petitioner shall file a fresh representation along with a certified copy of this order before respondent no.3, making his specific claim for payment of arrears of salary and further specifying the facts, reasons and grounds on which such claim is based. Such representation may be supported by an affidavit annexing therein all documents that petitioner seeks to rely upon. Representation, if any, may be necessarily filed within three weeks from today;

¶14

(ii) upon such representation being filed by the petitioner, the Block Development Officer, Afzalgarh, Bijnor shall seek verification of the same from respondent no.3 and make such and other inquiry as may be required;

¶15

(iii) in the event the said respondent is of prima facie view that the representation/application deserves to be rejected, he may issue a prior show cause notice to the petitioner specifying the points on which the petitioner's representation is proposed to be rejected within one month therefrom;

¶16

(iv) the petitioner shall be at liberty to file his final reply to such notice, if issued, within fifteen days and no more from the date of receipt of that notice;

¶17

(v) the respondent no.3 may proceed to hear and decide the same strictly, in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four months from the date of filing of last reply by the petitioner, if any.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.11.2018 Abhilash

Pitambar Dutt Sharma v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Pitambar Dutt Sharma v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sawanley Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. through the Chief Secy. Panchayat Raj Up and Ors.

M/S Vandana Distributors Vs the Commissioner of Trade Tax U.P.

Ram Bir Singh Vs the Commandant Vith Battalian P.A.C. Meerut and Others

Raja Ram Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Others

Krishan Pal Singh Vs the Divisional Forest Officer and Others

The Commissioner, Commercial Tax Vs S/S Kamta Prasad Braj Mohan Lal