Vineet Saran, J. - (1.) BRIEF facts of this case are that the respondent No. 4 was in the centralized service cadre of the local bodies of the State of U.P. in the year 1987, while he was posted as Junior Engineer at the Water Works, Unnao, he filed Claim Petition No. 334 of 1987 before the U.P. Public Services Tribunal claiming that he was entitled to promotion as Assistant Engineer from the date when his juniors had been promoted along with all consequential benefits pay and allowances. In the said claim petition the respondent No. 4 had arrayed State of U.P. through Secretary, Department of Nagar Vikas, Director of Local Bodies and two other private persons as opposite parties. However, in the meantime, as the respondent No. 4 was in the centralized service, on 13.7.1989 he was transferred from Water Works, Unnao to Kanpur Jal Sansthan. Thereafter, on 30.1.1992, the claim petition filed by the respondent No. 4 was allowed by the U.P. Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow. Pursuant thereto, the said respondent No. 4 filed Execution Case No. 4 of 1993 before the Additional District Judge, Kanpur in which the same opposite parties were arrayed who were there in the claim Petition. On 2.5.1996, the Executing Court passed the following Order: Whereas the Decree -holder Shri Naval Kishore Gupta, presently employed as Assistant Engineer, Kanpur Jal Sansthan, Kanpur has applied under Order 21 Rule 52 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for attachment of an amount of Rs. 1,14,402=00, being the amount of arrears of pay and allowances due and payable to him by the State of Uttar Pradesh, in terms of the judgment and directions dated 20.1.1992 passed in the Claim Petition No. 334/11/87, Naval Kishore Gupta, Petitioner v. State of U.P. and Ors., decided by the U.P. Public Services Tribunal No. II, Lucknow from the Account No. 2053 of the Kanpur Nagar District Administration, controlled by the Collector & District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, you are hereby directed to withhold and keep attached an amount of Rs. 1.14,402=00 from the said Account in the Treasury, Kanpur Nagar subject to and till the further Orders of this Court; you are hereby prohibited and restrained from permitting transfer or making payment of such amount from the said amount to anyone. Instead of complying the said direction, on 1.6.1996 the respondent No. 5, the Up -Ziladhikari, Kanpur wrote to the Punjab National Bank for recovery of Rs. 1,14,402/ - from the Jal Sansthan, Kanpur. Pursuant thereto, on the direction of the respondent No. 5, the Punjab National Bank attached the Account No. 5594 of she Kanpur Jal Sansthan and thereafter prepared a banker's cheque for an amount of Rs. 1,14,414/ - from the said account of the Kanpur Jal Sansthan and deposited the same before the Executing Court. In the aforesaid facts, this writ petition has been filed with the prayer for quashing the order dated 1.0.1996 passed by the Up Ziladhikari, Kanpur Nagar and for returning the banker's cheque to the Punjab National Bank for being credited in the account of the Kanpur Jal Sansthan and also for declaring the award of the Tribunal as inoperative and not binding on the Kanpur Jal Sansthan.
(2.) I have heard Sri R.M. Saggi, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 and Sri S.K. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 and have perused the record. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not even arrayed as a party before the Tribunal in the claim petition filed by the respondent No. 4 nor was there any direction issued by the Executing Court for realization of any amount from the petitioner, but still the Up Ziladhikari, in a totally illegal manner, proceeded as if he was over and above the Executing Court and issued directions of recovery7 from the petitioner The Executing Court had clearly directed the Treasury Officer to attach the account of the District Magistrate/Collector, kanpur Nagar but instead of complying with the said order, the Up Ziladhikari did not permit such attachment and diverted it against the Kanpur Jal Sansthan. It has been submitted that since the respondent No. 4 was in the centralized service and at the time of filing of the claim petition he was not even posted at Kanpur, the Kanpur Jal Sansthan could not have been made liable for any payment towards arrears of salary and allowances etc. to the responded No. 4, even though he may have been subsequently transferred to the Kanpur Jal Sansthan.
(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel has submitted that since the petitioner was posted in the Kanpur Jal Sansthan at the time of pendency of the exec execution proceedings, hence the realization of the amount from the Kanpur Jal Sansthan was fully justified.;