- (1.) Heard Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri S.P. Tripathi, learned standing counsel for the opposite parties and perused the record.
(2.) Initially, the Petitioner for redressal of his grievance, approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 7750 (S/S) of 2009 ( Bindheshwari Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and others ) and on 1.12.2009 this Court passed the following orders: Issue notice to opposite pares Nos. 4 and 5. Submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the eligible candidate for being promoted ? to Class III by virtue ? of the fact he is working on the said post since 01.10.1973. His further submission is that the Petitioner is going to retire ? within a period of one and a half years. It is stated that no Class IV employee has been promoted on Class III post in promotee quota in the institution and the vacancy has been filled by direct requirement quota. He has placed reliance upon the decisions of this Court in the case of Jai Bhagwan Singh v. District Inspector of schools? Gautambudh Nagar and Ors., 2006 3 UPLBEC 2391 and ? in Writ Petition No. 4380 of 2007 ? Vinod Kumar Singh v. D.I.O.S. Azamgarh and othersdecided on 29.6.2009. The Petitioner is already working on the? promoted post under the orders of the Administrator. The matter requires consideration. In the above circumstances, it is hereby provided that the vacancy in question shall not be filled up by the direct recruitment quota till the Petitioner does not retire or any order is passed vacating the present interim order. As soon as the? Petitioner retires, the opposite parties will be at liberty to fill up the post by direct requirement quota. The salary of the Petitioner shall also be paid in accordance with the entitlement of Class III post.
(3.) Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned Counsel for applicant submits that inspite of directions given by this Court on 1.12.2009, salary has not been paid to the Petitioner for the post in question.;