HARIHAR PRASAD PATEL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents. By this petition petitioner has sought relief for quashing the impugned order dated 21.3.2006 passed by respondent No. 4 contained in Annexure -1 of the writ petition and a relief in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 10.4.2006 contained, in Annexure -15 of the writ petition in pursuance of Government Order dated 28.4.2005 contained in Aruioxure -4 of the writ petition and further to direct the payment mentioned therein, has been sought for.

(2.) THE reliefs sought in writ petition rest on the assertions that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Auditor in Co -operative Societies in the year 1973 and was promoted as Senior Auditor in the year 1994 and thereafter he was again promoted as Senior Auditor Grade on 29.9.2001. While working as Senior Auditor he was not paid his salary for December, 2000, January and September, 2001 and further April to July, 2002. He was also not paid traveling allowances for five months i.e. October and December, 1998, December, 1999 and December, 2000 as well as September, 2001. The amount of Bonus for the year 2000 -02 and 2002 -03 was also not paid to him. He was also not paid one day salary of 30th August, 2003. The petitioner repeatedly requested respondent Nos. 2 to 4 for payment of afore stated dues and sent written representations to them. However neither any speaking order was passed by the respondents nor the payments were made under any of the aforesaid heads, as such having no alternative, he filed Writ Petition No. 50664 of 2002 before this Court for redressal of his aforesaid grievances.

(3.) ON the basis of the aforesaid Government Order dated 28.4.2005 Mukhya Lekha Pariksha Adhikari, Sahakari Samitiyan Evam Panchayaten, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow wrote a circular letter to Sambhagiya Mukhya Lekha Pariksha Adhikari, Sahkari Samitiyan Evam Panchayaten, Allahabad respondent No. 3 on 12.5.2005 enclosing the copy of the Government Order dated 28.4.2005 with a direction lo him to ensure compliance of the said Government Order, who, in turn, wrote a letter to Zila Lekha Pariksha Adhikari, Sahkari Samitiyan Evam Panchayaten, Alhhabad respondent No. 4 on 19.5.2005 directing him, who was responsible for the aforesaid payment, that payment should be ensured to Senior Auditors in accordance with the aforesaid Government Order and circulars issued by Higher Officers of the department by enclosing the Government Order and aforesaid circular. The orders/letters dated 12.5.2005 and 19.5.2005 are on record as Annexures -5 and 6 of the writ petition. It is stated in para 20 of the writ petition that during the pendency of writ petition earlier filed by the petitioner, the District Lekha Pariksha Adhikari has given payment of other seven Senior Auditors who have been mentioned in the said Government Order but the petitioner has been denied payment by respondent No. 4. The aforesaid fact has also been admitted in para 18 of the counter affidavit. However, ultimately the claim of petitioner has been denied vide impugned order dated 21.3.2006 contained in Annexure -1 of the writ petition, hence this petition.