- (1.) HEARD Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State respondent and also perused the record.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the order dated 14.11.2003 by which his representation for payment of regular monthly salary was rejected by the District Panchayat Raj Adhikari, Balrampur. Along with this prayer other consequential reliefs are also sought.
(3.) AS per factual matrix, the petitioner was appointed under Rule 220 -A of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) on commission basis for working as Kurk Amin and collecting panchayat tax vide order dated 19.4.1982. Later on, he moved an application for payment of salary on monthly basis, which was rejected by the impugned order. Hence, this writ petition. Learned standing counsel opposed the prayer and submitted that impugned order was passed on 14.11.2003, and present petition has been filed in the year 2010, so it is highly delayed. It was further submitted that petitioner is claiming parity along with Kurk Amin appointed by the State Government, which is not permissible, as appointment of Kurk Amin in those caseswas done by the State Government, and appointment of petitioner was done by the District Panchayat Raj Adhikari, Balrampur.;