D.S.Sinha, J. - (1.) KM. Indu Mehta, an Advocate practising at District Court, Kanpur, feeling aggrieved by the order dated 21st May, 1985 endorsed to her by the Additional District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat vide communication dated 28th May, 1985, consequential orders of District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat dated 7th June, 1985 and 3rd April, 1986, true copies whereof have been appended to her petition as Annexure'II', TV', and 'V, has approached this court for redressal under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE fact, in brief, giving rise to the controversy raised in the instant petition are as follows :- THE petitioner was initially appointed as a panel lawyer (Criminal) in the year 1979. THEreafter, in May, 1980 she was appointed as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) for the district of Kanpur Dehat and took over the charge of the said assignment on 16th June, 1980. In the year 1982 the post of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), formerly held by one Sri Brij Mohan Kaul, fell vacant. To fill up the aforesaid vacancy the candidature of several Advocates was under consideration by the District Judge, Non-metropolitan area, Kanpur and the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat. In the list of the candidates prepared by the District Judge, Non-metropolitan area, Kanpur the name of the petitioner was at the top. THE District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, also concurred with the recommendation of the District Judge and recommended the name of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat by means of his letter dated 31st December, 1982, addressed to the Deputy Legal Remembrancer, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Nyaya Mantrana Anubhag, Lucknow, a true copy whereof is Annexure 'I' to the petition. In the concluding part of this letter it is stated that Km. Indu Mehta would function as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Non- metropolitan area, Kanpur in anticipation of the approval and till final orders were passed by the Government. A copy of this letter was endorsed to the petitioner also for information and necessary action. In pursuance of the aforesaid communication of the District Magistrate, the petitioner took over as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) for Kanpur Dehat and worked as such during the period between 1st January, 1983 and 30th April, 1985. After 30th April, 1985 the petitioner resumed back her initial assignment of a panel lawyer and is continuing in that capacity. For the period she worked as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat, the petitioner was paid her fee at the rate of Rs. 38/- per day, a rate which is admissible to the Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal). The matter of the approval of the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat, and passing of the final orders on the subject lingered with the government and the government kept on slumbering for an interminable period of about two and a half years. During this period no body ever objected to the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat, and her functioning as such. Not only that no body, including Government, objected to the appointment and functioning of the petitioner as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat, she was paid fees also at the rate admissible to the holder of the post of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal). J Suddenly the Government woke up on 21st May, 1985, and passed order of the date, a copy of which was endorsed to the petitioner from the of District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, vide communication dated 28th May, 1985 This letter of the government, dated 21st May, 1985, which is Annexure 'IV the petition, informed the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, that the Governor had been pleased to cancel the order of the District Magistrate, appointing the petitioner as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) in anticipation of the approval of the Government on the ground that the order of the District Magistrate, appointing the petitioner as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), was illegal. In the second paragraph of this letter it was further notified that for the work done as Assistant District Government Counsel during the period between 1st January, 1983 and 30th April, 1985 the petitioner would be entitled to only such flees as was admissible to a panel lawyer.
(3.) AS a follow up measure, the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, passed an order dated 7th June, 1985 (Annexure IV to the petition), purporting to inform the District Government Counsel (Criminal), Kanpur Dehat, of the cancellation of the order of appointment of the petitioner as ASsistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), by the Governor and calling upon him to apprise the petitioner that from the fee already received by her for the work done as ASsistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), in the vacancy of Sri Brij Mohan Kaul, she would have to refund excess payment at the rate of Rs. 8/- per day which she should immediately deposit with the office of the District Magistrate so that the Government could be informed to the same accordingly. It appears that the demand of the District Magistrate with regard to the refund of the alleged excess payment was not complied with by the petitioner and this led to passing of another order dated 28th February, 1986 by District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, (Annexure III to the petition), whereby the petitioner was again informed of the Government's decision to the effect that for the work done by her in the capacity of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), she would be entitled to only such fees as was payable to a panel lawyer. This order further purported to apprise the petitioner that during the period between December, 1982 and April, 1985, she had received excess payment amount to Rs. 5056/- and that the same was liable to be recovered from her. The order also called upon the petitioner to refund the aforesaid excess amount of Rs. 5056/- and deposit the same in the Government Treasury without any delay.;