High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Lal Pratap Singh v. U.P. Co-Oper. Employees Institution Service Board & Others - WRIT - A No. 38615 of 2006  RD-AH 8271 (2 May 2007)
HON. SHISHIR KUMAR,J
I have heard Sri A.C. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.S. Baghel for the respondents.
The controversy involved in the present writ petition as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in spite of the fact that the petitioner is working on the post of clerk/cashier i.e. Group-C post from 1992 but the salary to that effect is not being paid to the petitioner. It has further been submitted by the petitioner that a compromise was arrived at between the petitioner as well as the Management on 7.2.1996 that the petitioner who is working on the post of clerk/cashier will be entitled to get the regular salary according to rules from February 1996. A condition was also imposed that it may be registered with the Labour Commissioner, Allahabad and after that it will be implemented. The said compromise was registered with the Labour Commissioner, Allahabad on 28.6.1996. The petitioner submits that in spite of the aforesaid fact, the petitioner is not being paid the salary for which the petitioner is entitled. It has further been submitted that as the compromise has already been registered with the Labour Commissioner and it has not yet been set aside by any competent Court, therefore, it is binding upon the respondents and they cannot go behind the agreement which has been arrived at between the parties. The petitioner submits that in spite of the various representations and request by the petitioner, the petitioner is not being paid the salary for the post on which he is working. To this effect the petitioner has submitted a representation which is annexed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition. As the request of the petitioner was not considered, as such, the petitioner has approached this Court.
By order dated 21.7.2006 the respondents were granted time to file counter affidavit but in spite of the time granted by this Court, no counter affidavit has been filed.
In view of the aforesaid fact, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondent no.3 to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the agreement as well as the registration dated 28.6.96 which is binding upon the respondent no.3. While considering the case of the petitioner the respondent no.3 will take into consideration the fact that the authorities are bound by the agreement arrived at as well as the conciliation proceeding which has already been registered before the Labour Commissioner, Allahabad. The appropriate and detailed order according to law regarding entitlement and payment be passed by the respondent no.3 within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is also made clear that if ultimately respondent no.3 comes to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the pay scale for which he has sought relief before this Court, the same may be paid within two moths.
With the aforesaid directions the writ petition is disposed of.
W.P. No. 38615 of 2006
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.