Disposed

Vijendra Kumar v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022WRIA/19834/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition sought higher pay from a commencement date instead of the actual approval date. The court disposed of the petition directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation within two weeks for the department to pass a fresh order on the effective date of pay revision, with provisions for interest on delayed payment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh representation within two weeks; Respondent to pass fresh order on effective date within three months; pay due within one month with 8% interest for delay.

Vijendra Kumar Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19834 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Solitary grievance of the petitioner appears to be, higher pay on the post of Principal claimed by him ought to have been fixed and approved w.e.f. 01.04.2019 since when the petitioner is officiating on the post of Principal at Ram Shankar Sachchidanand Pal Krishak Inter College, Sikri, Sant Kabir Nagar. Instead, at present, respondent no.3 has approved such payment from 03.01.2022.

¶6

In view of the limited dispute brought before this Court, it is considered desirable, the petitioner may be allowed to represent again to respondent no.3 with respect to the grievance noted above.

¶7

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with a direction, in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before respondent no.3 within a period of two weeks from today, supported by his personal affidavit, annexing thereto such documents as the petitioner may seek to rely and disclosing necessary facts, the said respondent may pass a fresh order only with respect to the date from which higher pay of Principal may be due to the petitioner. It is clarified, such order may not adversely affect the rights of the petitioner as have already been determined, as on date.

¶8

The above exercise may be completed, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of compliance shown by the petitioner.

¶9

Any amount found admittedly payable, be paid out to the petitioner within a further period of one month therefrom, failing which, the same shall attract interest liability @ 8% from the date of the amount becoming due till the date of actual payment.

¶10

Order Date :- 1.12.2022 Abhilash

¶11

Digitally signed by ABHILASH SINGH Date: 2022.12.01 13:44:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijendra Kumar v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Srivastava and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh Tiwari and 16 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Dhirendra Pratap Ojha and 4 Others Vs State of U P and Another

Girish Chandra and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahipal Singh Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukat Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others