Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Sudama Tiwari v. State Of U.P. And Ors. - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 762 of 2000 [2005] RD-AH 1032 (11 April 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 32


                Special Appeal No. 762 of 2000.

Sudama Tiwari                                                Appellant


State of U.P. & others                                    Respondents.


Hon. S.Rafat Alam, J.

Hon. Vikram Nath,J.

This appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 13.10.2000 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23574 of 1997 dismissing the writ petition.

It appears that the petitioner-appellant was working as Tube-well Operator in the department of Irrigation (Tube-well), Circle Mirzapur, however, he did not attend his duties since 01st October 1979 to 28th February 1997 without taking leave/ permission from the concerned authority. Consequently, notice was given to him to join his duty. Despite that he neither submitted any reply nor joined. Thereafter, despite publication of notice in newspaper on 03.07.1982 he did not join his duty. The respondents, thereafter, terminated his service vide order dated 16.08.1982 with effect from 01.10.1979. The petitioner-appellant after lapse of more that 10 years filed Writ Petition No. 29179 of 1993 challenging the above order of termination, which was allowed by learned Single Judge vide order dated 31.01.1997. In the impugned order termination was quashed and respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner. However, in respect of back wages the liberty was given to the petitioner-appellant to make representation before the concerned authority. The concerned authority, thereafter, having considered the representation, rejected the same for the payment of back wages. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed writ petition No. 23574 of 1997 claiming back wages for the period from 01.10.1979 to 28.02.1997, which was dismissed by judgment and order dated 13.10.2000, which is impugned in this special appeal.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant and also perused the order of the leaned Single Judge.

It is an admitted position that the petitioner did not work from 1st October 1979 to 28th February 1997. It is also admitted that without taking prior permission of leave he left the job and did not attend the office from 1st October 1979 to 28th February 1997. Further it appears that even the order of termination, which was passed in the year 1982, was challenged in the year 1993 after lapse more than 11 years. Therefore, it appears that the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that mere setting aside of the order of termination, does not entitle the petitioner to claim of back wages from 01.10.1079 to 28.02.1997. Despite notice, the petitioner-appellant chose not to join his services and, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to claim of back wages for the aforesaid period. There is no fault in the order of the learned Single Judge. The special appeal is, accordingly dismissed.  


v.k.updh. (v-71)


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.