RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. U.P. RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD.
LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-70
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on October 16,2015

RAMESHWAR PRASAD Appellant
VERSUS
U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Akhtar Husain Khan, J. - (1.) PETITIONER Rameshwar Prasad has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers; "(i) That a writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing that part of the order dated 21.12.1999 by which the petitioner has been absorbed on the post of Project Manager w.e.f. 19.11.1988. (ii) That a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to absorb the petitioner on the post of General Manager in the U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. w.e.f. 19.11.1990 by treating him on the post of General Manager w.e.f. 1.1.1990 on the date he was promoted to the post of Superintending Engineer (Selection Grade) in his parent organisation. (iii) That a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to grant the petitioner the promotion to the next higher post of Chief General Manager/Jt. Managing Director with effect from 1.1.1994 on the basis of his absorption in the U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. at the appropriate post from the appropriate date as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as per eligibility criteria for promotion provided in the Service Rule, 1980 of Nigam and in view of the fact that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Chief Engineer Grade II by the parent department from 1.1.1994 which has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment. (iv) That a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to pay to the petitioner all arrears of salary and allowances which have accrued to him on the basis of his absorption in the U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. and consequential promotions. (v) That such other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner may also be passed in the interest of justice. (vi) That the cost of the petition be awarded to the petitioner."
(2.) PARTIES have exchanged their affidavits. We have heard Mr. Satya Narain Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shishir Jain, learned counsel for U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd.
(3.) IN brief, the relevant facts for determination of this writ petition, are that the petitioner, Rameshwar Prasad, was working on the post of Executive Engineer in U.P. Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (herein after referred to as 'UPSICL'. He joined as Project Manager in U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Nigam') on deputation on 29.11.1985. Thereafter on 22.12.1987 the General Manager of the Nigam wrote him letter inviting his option for his permanent absorption in prescribed proforma on or before 31.12.1987. Petitioner gave his option on 31.12.1987. Thereafter on 17.9.1988 the General Manager (North East Zone) of the Nigam wrote a letter to the General Manager (Head Quarters) that the petitioner had completed three years as Project Manager, his work and conduct during this period was excellent and it would be in the interest of Nigam to absorb him.;


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