Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr Amit Bose, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the Petitioner's case are that by the order dated 26.12.1997, the Petitioner was dismissed from service in pursuance of the departmental proceedings conducted against him on the allegation of having contracted a second marriage during the subsistence of his first marriage and thereby had violated the provisions of Rule 29 of the U. P. Government Servants Conduct Rules. Being aggrieved, he filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, PAC, Bareilly Sector, Bareilly, which was rejected by the order dated 24.2.1998. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the Petitioner filed Claim Petition No. 1144 of 1998 before the State Public Services Tribunal. By the judgment and order dated 9.1.2008, the Tribunal allowed the Claim Petition and the order of punishment dated 26.12.1997 and appellate order dated 24.2.1998 were quashed and a direction was issued to the opposite parties to the claim petition to reinstate the Petitioner in service with continuity in service from 16.12.1997 and all consequential benefits with a further direction to the opposite parties to pass a speaking order in respect of the pay and allowances payable to the Petitioner from 26.12.1997 till his reinstatement in service. It was also directed in the aforesaid judgment and order that the directions issued therein should be complied within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the aforesaid judgment and order. Thereafter, by a representation dated 17.1.2008 preferred by the Petitioner, the aforesaid judgment and order was served on the Commandant, 2nd Battalion PAC, Sitapur. In the meantime, the State preferred a writ petition No. 837 (SB) of 2008, which was dismissed by the order dated 28.4.2009. Being aggrieved, the Special Leave Petition was filed which too was dismissed by the judgment and order dated 9.10.2009 resulting thereby the judgment and order passed in Claim Petition attains finality. Thereafter, by an order dated 10.12.009, the Petitioner was reinstated in service by the Commandant, 2nd Battalion, Sitapur.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has approached the opposite parties for payment of backwages by preferring representation which was decided by means of impugned order dated 24.1.2010, by which it has been directed that the Petitioner would be paid Re.1/ -per month with effect from 26.12.1997.;