VIENDRA SINGH PAWAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.

(2.) The petitionerr is aggrieved by non-payment of Bonus, extra pay and encashment of leave on his reinstatement with back wages and all other emoluments including the promotional benefits.

(3.) The petitioner States that he has made representations on 13th October. 1993 and 18th May, 1994 to the authority concerned but no action has been taken on the aforesaid representations. The other Sub-Inspectors, who are similarly situated, have been given the selection grade and super-selection grade, but the petitioner is being discriminated by the respondents.