DAMBARUDHAR PATHAK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The pleaded facts in the writ petition reveals that this is the third round of litigation between the parties before this Court. In the previous round of litigation before this Court, viz. WP(C) No. 367/2007, the Court had passed an order dated 29.01.2007 disposing of the case wherein it had directed the petitioner to submit a representation to the Deputy Director, Navodaya Vidyalaya Sangathan, New Delhi with all relevant documents for consideration of his claim for pay and allowances for the period from 17.10.2001 to 26.05.2003. In the said order dated 29.01.2007, the Court further directed the respondents to consider the same within a period of three months. The petitioner submitted his representation on 07.02.2007 which was rejected by the official respondents through their memorandum dated 11.06.2007 wherein it was stated that the petitioner was not entitled to any pay and allowances for the period in question, in the absence of taking over charge of the Principal of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya ('JNV' for short), Darrang. The petitioner, therefore, approached the learned Central Administrative Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short), Guwahati Bench by filing OA No. 98/2009 seeking release of his pay and allowances for the period from 17.10.2001 to 26.05.2003. The learned Tribunal dismissed the said OA through its order dated 19.05.2010, thereby affirming the memorandum dated 11.06.2007 issued by the respondents. This order of the learned Tribunal passed on 19.05.2010 and the memorandum dated 11.06.2007 has been assailed before the Court by the petitioner in the present writ proceeding. To arrive at any conclusion as regards the validity of the said order dated 19.05.2010 and memorandum dated 11.06.2007, the Court has thus to determine the following issue:--

(2.) In terms of the order dated 09.04.2002 passed in OA No. 426/2001, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation indicating therein his willingness for permanent absorption in NVS, which, however, was rejected on 10.06.2002 holding that the notification dated 21.06.2001 has not yet been ratified by the Executive Committee of the Samity and as such the said notification has no force in the eye of law and the benefit of the Notification lacks its sanctity in the matter of permanent absorption. The order of rejection of his representation dated 10.06.2002 gave rise to OA No. 231 of 2002 before the Tribunal.

(3.) However, during the pendency of OA No. 231 of 2002 before the Tribunal, the official respondents took up the order dated 09.04.2002 passed in OA No. 426 of 2001 on the file of this Court being WP(C) No. 135 of 2003. The said writ petition came up for consideration on 08.05.2003, whereby this Court allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order dated 09.04.2002 passed by the learned Tribunal in OA No. 426 of 2001. However, in the concluding paragraph of the order, the Court observed that the respondent (in the writ petition) shall be entitled for all the salaries for the period he had worked in the post of Principal of the School, may be as a result of the interim or the final order issued by the learned Tribunal or by the High Court directing that the salaries shall be paid by the authority within a period of three months from the passing of the order.