Dismissed

State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary, Secondary Education and 4 Others v. Ram Sumer Sharma and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2021SPLAD/1308/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Court dismissed a delay condonation application and the underlying appeal. Applying precedents, the court held that recovery of salary from a retired class-IV employee is impermissible despite non-regularization, especially given a prior writ direction for regularization.

What did the court decide?

Delay condonation application and appeal stood dismissed.

State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1308 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- State Of U.P. Through Its Principal Secretary, Secondary Education And 4 Others Respondent :- Ram Sumer Sharma And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Anuruddh Charan Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Vikas Budhwar

¶4

Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Order on Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 2 of 2020

¶6

Heard on the application for condonation of delay. The delay is of 357 days.

¶7

No justification regarding the delay has been given other than to refer administrative reason but delay on that ground cannot be condoned in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.971 of 2020 (State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Prem Chandra) .

¶8

However, before dismissing the application, we have entered into the merit of the case.

¶9

It is a case where the non-appellant/petitioner worked with the appellant/respondent pursuant to the appointment order and now the amount is sought to be recovered after his retirement on the ground that he was not appointed as per the provisions of law.

¶10

Learned Single Judge caused interference in the order in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih, 2014 (8) SCC 883 . The judgment applies not only for the reason that non-appellant/petitioner has already retired but was working on class-IV post. The recovery of salary against a retired or class-IV employee is not being permitted. It is otherwise not a case where recovery could have been sought from a person having appointed by the respondents themselves and worked for years together. The nonappellant/petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition to seek regularization and it was disposed of with the direction to respondents to consider his case for regularization. When compliance of the direction was not made, a contempt petition was filed.

¶11

In the background aforesaid, we do not find even a case on merit, thus, the appeal fails not only on the dismissal of the application but even on merit.

¶12

The delay condonation application stands dismissed .

¶13

Order on Memo of Appeal

¶14

In view of the facts aforesaid, the appeal also stands dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 18.1.2021 //Nirmal//

State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary, Secondary Education and 4 Others v. Ram Sumer Sharma and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary, Secondary Education and 4 Others v. Ram Sumer Sharma and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anand Prakash Singh Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vivek Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Asloom Khan @ Asloob Khan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Surendra Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Bhawan Yadav and 18 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others