RAKESH TIWARI, BHARAT BHUSHAN, JJ. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.R. Maurya and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. This petition is preferred for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the judgment and order dated 01.10.2004 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No. 503/2002, Chokhelal Vs. Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra and others. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has allowed the claim petition, directing the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra to allow salary to the petitioner as admissible for working on the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari for the period he worked on the said post and to make payment @12% simple interest per annum on the amount from 1.5.2000 till its actual date of payment to the petitioner for delayed payment of pensionary benefits.
(2.) THE facts as culled out from the record are that Sri Filvard Kunwar Virendra Singh who was working as Nagar Shiksha Adhikari in Nagar Nigam, Agra, retired from the post on 30.4.1999. The petitioner being senior most person working on the post of Assistant Nagar Shiksha Adhikari, was directed to hold additional charge of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari vide letter dated 29.4.1999 issued by Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari. The letter dated 29.4.1999 reads : JUDGEMENT_816_TLALL0_2013.jpg JUDGEMENT_816_TLALL0_20131.jpg It appears that Shri Chokhe Lala, respondent no. 2 took charge of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari on 30.4.1999. One Sri Rajendra Singh , Nagar Shiksha Adhikari working in district Kanpur was transferred to Agra on the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari, Nagar Nigam, Agra. Consequently, Sri Chokhe Lal, respondent no. 2 was directed to handover the charge to Sri Rajendra Singh. However, he, vide his letter dated 5.8.1999, declined to handover charge on the pretext that elections have been declared and continued to hold charge of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari till his retirement on 31.1.2000. On his retirement, Sri Chokhe Lal, respondent no. 2 was paid all his retiral dues as admissible under law but a claim petition was preferred by him stating that he has not been paid salary of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari for the period i.e. 30.4.1999 upto 31.1.2000, he had worked on it. He also claimed interest on delayed payment of retiral dues with12% interest per annum. The case of the petitioners before the Tribunal was that though Shri Chokhelal had been given additional charge of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari, Agra pursuant to the order dated 29.4.1999 but this was a local/temporary arrangement and that on posting of Sri Rajendra Singh on the said post, the charge was not handed over by Sri Chokhe Lal which was in violation of lawful orders and as he continued to hold charge of the post illegally till his retirement, he was not entitled to any claim in view of Rule 49 (III) and (IV) of the U.P. Fundamental Rules.
(3.) ACCORDING to the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent no. 2 had not discharged the role of the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari, Nagar Nigam beyond period of 19 days but had illegally continued to hold charge. He assailed the order dated 1.10.2004 stating the order impugned passed by the Tribunal is illegal and arbitrary stating that respondent had not been promoted to the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari at any time and was working in the local arrangement till posting of the new incumbent. Sri Rajendra Singh who joined the post on 13.7.1999 and that the temporary arrangement came to an automatic end within a span of 44 days, as such, respondent no. 2, Chokhelal is not entitled to retiral benefits calculated on the basis of holding charge on the post of Nagar Shiksha Adhikari in view of Rule 49 (IV) of the U.P. Fundamental Rules which reads thus: "No additional pay shall be admissible to a Government Servant who is appointed to hold current charge of the routine duties of another post or post suspension of the duration of the additional charge." ;