PREM NARAIN MISRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Orders dated 13.02.2009 and 20.02.2009 passed in this writ petition (on the order-sheet) are quoted below: "13.02.2009 Petitioner was removed from service. He raised industrial dispute. Matter was decided in his favour. Reinstatement with full back wages and continuity in service was ordered by the labour court. The said award was maintained by this Court as well as by the Supreme Court. Petitioner has been regularised on Class-IV post. The grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner is that apart from petitioner, all other similarly situate persons have been promoted to the post of junior clerk (Class-III post). Learned counsel for the State respondent states that other similarly situate Class-IV employees were promoted to the post of junior clerk in view of G.O. dated 14.12.1990. Learned standing counsel further states that by virtue of the said G.O., only those persons were promoted, who were working at that time, while petitioner was not working at that time. Even though the statement is correct, however by virtue of subsequent award of the labour court, it would be deemed that petitioner was working on 14.12.1990. On the principles of Section 89, C.P.C., the Court suggests that both the parties may try to settle the dispute amicably. One of the modes of the settlement may be that class-III post is given to the petitioner prospectively, i.e. from the date on which order in that regard is passed in this writ petition. List on 20.02.2009 in order to know the response of the learned counsel for both the parties to the above Court suggested compromise. Office is directed to supply a copy of this order free of cost to Sri Mohan Singh, learned standing counsel, by 16.02.2009. 20.02.2009 Learned standing counsel has placed on record the response of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad dated 19.02.2009 in response to Court's order dated 13.02.2009. However, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is agreeable to the suggestion of the court contained in the order dated 13.02.2009 with the further request that seniority may be granted to him so that he may be benefited in his pension when he retires. Order reserved. Arguments had already been heard on merit on the last date in detail." In view of setting aside of termination order by the labour court, directing reinstatement and actual reinstatement with full back-wages of the petitioner, he would be deemed to be in continuous service since his appointment as well as on 14.12.1990 when the aforesaid G.O. was passed (petitioner was appointed in 1983, services were terminated on 01.11.1986 and termination order was set aside by the labour court through award dated 10.10.1991). In view of the above, writ petition is allowed. Order dated 21.01.1997 (Annexure SA-2) is set aside. A mandamus is issued directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of junior clerk on regular basis with effect from today. However, petitioner shall be granted seniority with effect from the date on which any similarly situate person junior to him was promoted/ regularised on the post of junior clerk.