Arun Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Education (Secondary) and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Arun Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Education (Secondary) and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before opposite party no. 4 (District Inspector of Schools, Unnao) regarding arrears of salary; the representation to be considered and decided in accordance with law within eight weeks of production of a certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the opposite parties should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation for payment of arrears of salary w.e.f. 07.08.1993 till 31.03.2000, with interest thereupon.

Court's answer

Although the petitioner's claim for arrears of salary had been agitated earlier, no directions were issued to the concerned authorities in that regard, apparently inadvertently.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty granted to the petitioner to file a representation before opposite party no. 4, the District Inspector of Schools, Unnao, with regard to the grievance of unpaid arrears of salary.

Key takeaways

The District Inspector of Schools, Unnao shall consider and decide the representation in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date a certified copy of the order is produced before him.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service matter (WRIT - A No. 7817 of 2024, Lucknow Bench, Manish Mathur J., decided 12.9.2024): Petitioner, appointed Assistant Teacher on 04.08.1993 by the Committee of Management against a short-term vacancy, sought a direction to consider his representation for payment of arrears of salary w.e.f. 07.08.1993 till 31.03.2000 with interest. Earlier writ petitions (No. 2907 (S/S) of 1994; No. 6085 (S/S) of 2006 invoking Section 33F of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Boards Act, 1982; No. 10393 of 2006; and No. 378 (S/S) of 2007) had dealt with payment of current salary and reconsideration of his regularization claim, pursuant to which he stood regularized, but the arrears claim remained unadjudicated. Holding that the claim had been raised earlier but directions were inadvertently not issued, the Court disposed of the petition granting liberty to file a representation before the District Inspector of Schools, Unnao, to be decided in accordance with law within eight weeks of production of a certified copy of the order.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63146

Court No. - 18

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7817 of 2024

Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Awasthi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Education (Secondary) And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shradha Mishra,Suyash Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Heard Ms. Shradha Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no. 1 to 4. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party no. 5 stands dispensed with.

Petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties to consider petitioner's representation for payment of arrears of salary w.e.f. 07.08.1993 till 31.03.2000. Interest thereupon has also been sought.

It is submitted that initially petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in the school concerned on 04.08.1993 by the Committee of Management against short-term vacancy but due to non-payment of salary, he filed Writ Petition No. 2907 (S/S) of 1994 in which vide interim order dated 05.05.2000, direction was issued for payment of current salary to petitioner in case no regularly selected candidate has joined on the post. The said petition was thereafter disposed of vide order dated 19.04.2016 directing the opposite parties for payment of salary to petitioner regularly in case he was working, in terms of interim order while granting liberty to challenge the order dated 03.11.2015 whereby petitioner's claim for regularization had been rejected.

It is submitted that thereafter petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 6085 (S/S ) of 2006 claiming benefit of Section 33F of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Boards Act, 1982. The said petition was also disposed of vide order dated 20.07.2006 directing opposite parties to consider claim of petitioner for regularization. He also filed another writ petition bearing No. 10393 of 2006 as well as Writ Petition No. 378 (S/S) of 2007 which was also disposed of vide order dated 23.02.2015 directing re-consideration of petitioner's case for regularization. The order also indicated that interim order granted earlier would remain available to petitioner.

It is submitted that in pursuance thereof, petitioner was regularized in service but he initial claimed of payment of salary for the period 1973 till 2000 still remains unadjudicated upon.

In view of submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner and upon perusal of material on record, it appears that although the aforesaid claim had been agitated by petitioner earlier but inadvertently no directions were issued to the concerned authorities with regard to same.

Liberty, therefore, is granted to petitioner to file a representation before opposite party no. 4 i.e. District Inspector of Schools, Unnao with regard to the aforesaid grievance, which shall be considered and decided in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority.

With aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of

Order Date :- 12.9.2024 Satish

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench