RAM SUCHIT YADAV AND 11 ORS Vs. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECY. IRRIGATION DEPTT. LKO. AND ORS
LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-358
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 03,2012

Ram Suchit Yadav And 11 Ors Appellant
VERSUS
State Of U.P. Through Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Devendra Kumar Arora,J - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for parties and perused the record.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay them regular payscale w.e.f. 31.3.1989 on which date the said benefits have been given to the petitioners of W.P. No. 3558 (SS) of 1992, Suresh Chandra Tiwari & others and petitioners of W.P. No. 42196 of 1992 from the date of their initial appointments as Tubewell Operators, with all consequential benefits of service together with arrears of pay. Submission of learned counsel for petitioners is that the petitioners were initially appointed on the post of Part -time Tubewell Operators in their respective divisions of the Irrigation Department between 01.01.1979 to 01.9.1987. Subsequently, vide notification dated 20.2.1992 their nomenclature was changed as Tubewell Assistant and an honorarium of 550/per month was fixed. The said notification was challenged by filing bunch of writ petitions leading with W.P. No. 3558 (SS) of 1992, Suresh Chandra Tewari & others vs. State of U.P. & others which were allowed vide judgment & order dated 18.5.1994 (Annexure No. 2) and the Notification dated 20.2.1992 was quashed. The opposite parties were directed to pay all the petitioners the same emoluments i.e. in the same scale of pay in which other regularly appointed tubewell operators were being paid. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners that the said judgment & order dated 18.5.1994 was challenged by the respondents before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by way of filing S.L.P. But the same was dismissed vide judgment & order dated 22.3.1995. Thereafter review of the judgment & order dated 22.3.1995 was also filed before the apex court but that too was rejected on 18.10.1995.
(3.) IT is further submitted that even after dismissal of review petition by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the respondents did not make compliance of the order and, therefore, contempt petitions no. 2134 (c) of 1995 ( Avadhesh Kumar Singh & others vs. Smt. Sunita Kandpal & others), 2136 (C) of 1995 (Surendra Pal Singh and others vs. Smt. Sunita Kandpal & others) and 3465 (C) of 1995 ( Brijendra Pal Singh Vs. Smt. Sunita Kandpal & others) were filed. In consequence of filing of contempt petitions, the respondents thereafter passed order dated 27.10.1995 providing the same emoluments to the said petitioners as were being paid to other regular tubewell operators.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.