Allowed

Maheshwar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Rural Development Lucknow andORS.

Allahabad HC21 May 2024WRIA/15455/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a writ petition seeking retrospective promotion for a petitioner whose adverse entry was expunged years later, directing state authorities to treat him as promoted from the original selection committee date.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 03.05.2017 is quashed; respondents directed to consider petitioner for promotion as Senior Clerk w.e.f. 03.11.2001 with consequential benefits, excluding arrears of pay.

Maheshwar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:38432

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15455 of 2017 Petitioner :- Maheshwar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Rural Development Lucknow Andors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhup Chandra Singh,Ajay Pratap Singh Vatsa,Narendra Kumar Pandey,Ravi Shanker Tripathi,Satyendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

The claim of the petitioner for retrospective promotion as Sr. Clerk rather promotion w.e.f the date his juniors were promoted, has been rejected vide order impugned dated 03.05.2017, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition on the ground that when the selection committee met on 03.11.2001, the petitioner though considered was found unfit on account of there being an adverse entry.

¶7

Admittedly, subsequent thereto, the petitioner has been promoted from the post of Junior Clerk as Senior Clerk on 20.08.2007. The adverse entry has also been expunged vide order dated 29.03.2016, a copy of which is annexure 7 to the writ petition.

¶8

The Apex Court in the case of R.K.Singh Vs. State of U.P and Ors reported in 1991 Supp (2) SCC 126 has held that where a promotion has not been made on account of an adverse entry which is subsequently expunged then the person is entitled to be promoted (in that case to be granted selection grade) w.e.f the date on which he was eligible for grant of selection grade.

¶9

In this case too, despite the petitioner having been considered by the selection committee on 03.11.2001 yet had been found unfit on account of there being an adverse entry which admittedly has been expunged on 29.03.2016 and consequently, the petitioner would be entitled for being considered for promotion as Senior Clerk w.e.f the date the selection committee met i.e 03.11.2001 following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of R.K.Singh (supra) wherein the Apex Court has held as under:-

¶10

"2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that this appeal must succeed. There is no dispute that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant's representation against the adverse entries has been allowed and these entries have been expunged from his service record. Since the adverse entries were expunged the State Government by its order dated January 24, 1991 granted Selection Grade to the appellant with effect from the date he takes over charge. We fail to appreciate the view taken by the State Government. Once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged the appellant is entitled to Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 the date on which he was eligible for grant of Selection Grade. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal and modify the order of the State Government dated January 24, 1991 and direct

¶11

that the appellant shall be treated in Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 and he will be entitled to all other consequential benefits with effect from that date. As regards appellant's further promotion, he will be considered for promotion in accordance with Rules."

¶12

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 03.05.2017, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Senior Clerk w.e.f the date the selection committee met i.e 03.11.2001. In case, the petitioner is promoted w.e.f 03.11.2001 the consequences shall follow with the exception of arrears of pay which pay would be fixed notionally w.e.f the date of his promotion.

¶13

Let the respondents comply with this order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.5.2024 Pachhere/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Maheshwar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Rural Development Lucknow andORS.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maheshwar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Rural Development Lucknow andORS.

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

Ram Verma Vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Anot

Virendra Pratap Shukla Home Guard Resident NO.0234 Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Sec. Home Guards Lko. and Ors.

Sikandar Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Dr. Jagpal Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Health and Family Welfare U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Sri Prakash Narain Nigam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Food Safety and Drug Administration Lko. and 2 Others

Rahul Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Appointment Lko. and Others