UMESH NARAIN PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-104
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on October 05,2015

Umesh Narain Pandey Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 and 3-Gorakhpur Development Authority and have perused the record. By means of the present petition, the petitioner is praying that a mandamus be issued to the respondent authority to comply with the decision of the Claims Tribunal dated 21.8.1995.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Peon under the orders of the Vice President, Gorakhpur Development Authority through its letter dated 31.1.1978. On the allegations that the petitioner was absent from duty since 1.1.1981, his services were terminated by order simplicitor dated 13.3.1981. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the State Public Service Tribunal by filing a Claim Petition No. 772/II/85, which was allowed by judgement and order dated 21.8.95 setting aside the order of termination dated 13.3.1981 and it was further directed that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in continuous service with all the consequential benefits of pay and allowance etc. The arrears of pay should be paid to him within six months from the date of production of the judgement. Against the aforesaid judgement, the Development filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 27350 of 1996 in which interim order dated 23.8.1995 was granted by this Court. Subsequently the said petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 10.7.2002 and it was also provided that the interim order stands vacated.
(3.) It is admitted by the learned counsel for the parties that a time barred restoration application no. 128928 of 2002 is pending till date. The submission is that although there was no interim order operating as the same stood vacated in the year 2002 itself but the authority is not permitting the petitioner to join the services and is not paying arrears of salary to him. In effect, the petitioner is seeking execution of the decision of the Claims Tribunal dated 21.8.1995.;


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