Partly allowed

Radhey Shyam and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2019WRIA/19719/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, assistant teachers, challenged the illegal stoppage of their salary following an initiated inquiry. The court held that stopping salary without suspension or termination was ultra vires and violative of natural justice, directing the stoppage order be quashed and salary released immediately.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the direction to stop salary payment; directed respondents to release salary payments immediately as they were being received before the illegal stoppage order.

Radhey Shyam and 4 Others Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19719 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manu Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Manu Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no.2, 3 and 4.

¶6

The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to issue a mandamus directing the respondents authorities to ensure payment of salary to the petitioners, who are working on the post of Assistant Teachers in various institutions in District Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶7

On 9.12.2019 following order was passed :-

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.1 and Sri Manu Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no.2, 3 and 4.

¶10

The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to direct the respondents authorities to ensure the payment of salary to the petitioners, who are working on the post of Assistant Teachers in various institutions in DistrictSant Kabir Nagar.

¶11

It appears from perusal of the record that the petitioners were duly appointed on the post of Assistant Teachers. After conducting the enquiry order was passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Sant Kabir Nagar/respondent no.2 on 9.1.2018 by which the directions were given for the payment of salary of the petitioners, copy of the same is appended as annexure 2 to the writ petition.

¶12

It is argued that thereafter another order was passed by the Khand Shiksha Adhikari. After completing the formalities and after conducting the complete enquiry an order dated 30.5.2018 was passed by the respondent no.2 to make the payment of salary to the petitioners, copy of the aforesaid order is

¶13

appended as annexure 4 to the writ petition.

¶14

It is stated that in pursuant to the aforesaid order, petitioners started getting their salary. It is further argued that wholly illegally and without any notice and opportunity to the petitioners only on the basis of some complaint directions were given by the respondent no.2 to the respondent no.3 namely Khand Shiksha Adhikari, Block Nath Nagar, District Sant Kabir Nagar to enquire the complaint made by the complainant and submit his report within one week. The copy of the aforesaid letter was forwarded to the Finance and Account Officer (Basic), Sant Kabir Nagar, giving the directions by the respondent no.2 not to make any payment of salary to the petitioners till the conclusion of the enquiry. It is argued that the aforesaid part of the letter is erroneous in nature.

¶15

In this view of the matter, once after completing the formalities petitioners were appointed and orders for payment of salary was passed by the respondent no.2 and petitioners started getting salary, there was no rhyme or reason or occasion for the respondent no.2 to direct the Finance and Account Officer (Basic), Sant Kabir Nagar to stop the payment of salary to the petitioners.

¶16

The matter requires consideration.

¶17

A week's time is granted to learned counsel for the respondents to seek instructions in the matter.

¶18

Put up as fresh on 17.12.2019."

¶19

When the matter was taken up on 17.12.2019 again a request was made by Sri Manu Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 to 4 to grant some more time. Today again when the matter was taken up nothing has been stated by him on which basis payment of salary of the petitioners were stopped.

¶20

It appears from perusal of the record that after conducting enquiry order dated 30.5.2018 was passed by the respondent no.2 to release the salary of the petitioners. Pursuant to the same, petitioners started getting their salary but now wholly illegally in the teeth of the order dated 3.9.2019 the salary of the petitioners were stopped.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶22

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶23

Without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the District Basic Education Officer, Sant Kabir Nagar/respondent no.2 to conclude the pending enquiry contemplated by him vide its order dated 3.9.2019, copy of which is appended as annexure 7 to the writ petition, expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶24

In so far as the stoppage of salary of the petitioners are concerned since neither the petitioners were suspended nor terminated nor any order has been passed against them at any point of time stopping their salary, the directions given by the respondent no.2/Basic Education Officer (B.S.A.), Sant Kabir Nagar, District Sant Kabir Nagar, to the respondent no.3/Khand Shiksha Adhikari, Block Nath Nagar, District Sant Kabir Nagar, to the effect to stop the payment of salary to the petitioners is without any jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶25

In the facts and circumstances of the case, part of the order by which the directions were given by the respondent no.2 to the respondent no.3 to stop the payment of salary to the petitioners is hereby quashed. Respondents are directed to make payment of salary to the petitioners as they are getting before the order dated 3.9.2019 was passed.

¶26

Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Pramod Tripathi

Radhey Shyam and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhey Shyam and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Gaon Sabha Mohanpur through Pradhan Vs D.D.C. Judicial Varanasi and Others

Vimlesh Kumar Dev Pandey and Another Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Sonbhadra and 2 Others

Gopal Krishna Pandey Vs Settlement Officer of Consolidation Mau

Mahadeo Vs D.D.C.

Sunahari Lal and Another Vs Bhagwan Devi and 7 Others

Kunwar Sahib Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 5 Others