RAJ KISHORE MISRA Vs. ZILA PARISHAD UNNAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition relates to a service matter.

(2.) THE petitioners Raj Kishore Misra and Surendra Pratap Singh were appointed clerks in the office of the Antarim Zila Pari shad, Unnao, in the years 1961 and 1963 respectively and they were confirmed after a year in each case. When the U. P. Kshet-tra Samitis and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam, 1961 came into force they became the ser vants of the Zila Parishad, Unnao under the provisions of Section 46 of the said Act. The case of the petitioners is that two posts of Kar Nirikshaks were created on 29-7-1965 by the Zila Parishad Unnao (Opposite Party No. 1) in exercise of the power con ferred by Section 39 of the Act. Peti tioner No. 1 who was earlier working in the education section was transferred by the Mukhya Adhikari of the Zila Parishad (Opposite Party No. 3) to the main office of the Parishad and was given, in addition to his duties as a clerk, the duties of Kar Nirikshak. This was under order dated 4-7-68, copy of which is Annexure T to the writ petition. Petitioner No. 2 was transfer red under an order dated 29-8- 1967 to the post of Kar Nirikshak. Both were thus working as Kar Nirikshaks and getting Rs. 75-/p.m. by way of travelling allow ances in addition to then: salaries as clerks.

(3.) THE writ petition has been con tested by Opposite Party No. 1 on whose behalf a counter-affidavit has been filed and by Opposite Parties Nos. 5 and 6 who have filed a common counter-affidavit. The peti tioners have filed a rejoinder affidavit to the counter-affidavit of Opposite Parties Nos. 5 and 6. In the counter-affidavit of Opposite Party No. 1, it has been stated that though Sri Kripa Shanker Opposite Party No. 4, was nominated one of the members of the Chunao Samiti in 1967 but his term did not come to an end automatically on the expiry of one year from that date and he continu ed to be a member in the absence of a fresh nomination, there being no term fixed by the Karya Samiti in nominating Sri Shukla. It has also been said that the Hindi version of the Act does not provide for annual nomination. Sri Shukla was further again nominated on 30-7-1969. It has next been asserted that there is no Kar Adhikari in the Zila Parishad Unnao and that the Mukhya Adhikari acts also as the Kar Adhi kari as he is the head of Samanya Vibhag including the Kar and Accounts Depart ment. He is, therefore, said to have legally been a member of the Chunao Samiti for the selection in question and rightly acted as a member and secretary.