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


Tilak Bhagwan Lal v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 36885 of 1999 [2005] RD-AH 5585 (10 November 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. 27

Writ Petition No.  36885 of 1999

Tilak Bhagwan Lal                              Petitioner


State of U.P. & others.                       Respondents


Hon. Vikram Nath,

The petitioner was appointed on 12.05.1987 as Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 470-735 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition). Subsequently vide order dated 05.12.1989 passed by Senior Treasury Officer, Allahabad, the petitioner services were made permanent in the same pay scale of Rs. 470-735 as stenographer w.e.f. 01.06.1989 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition). It is alleged that the State Government issued a government order dated 24.01.1991 pursuant to the recommendation of the Samata Samiti (1989) wherein it was provided that all the post in the pay scale of Rs. 470-735 existing prior to 01.01.1986 shall be upgraded to pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200. The first grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to the said Government order dated 07.04.1992 the petitioner has not been placed in the pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200 but is being continued in the lower pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040 (equivelant to Rs. 470-735 pay scale). Various letters were issued by the Treasury Officer Allahabad through the District Magistrate Allahabad to the State Government recommending that the petitioner may be given pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200. In the meantime, the State Government issued another Government Order dated 16.07.1993 by which it was provided that with regard to the stenographers those of the incumbents who were receiving salary in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040 would be given pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 in their personal capacity. It was further provided that the stenographers who were attached with the head of the department, Junior head of department or with the officers of all India Services they would be entitled to pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600. Second grievance of the petitioner is that he is entitled to next higher scale. In this regard also the district authorities made recommendation to the State Government for giving higher scale to the petitioner. Since no decision was being taken , the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 12300 of 1995, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.03.1999 with the direction to the Director, Treasury to decide representation of the petitioner by speaking order.

Pursuant to the aforesaid direction the Director, Treasury vide order dated 01.06.1999 impugned in this writ petition has disposed of the representation holding that the post of stenographer attached to officer getting salary in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500 and 3700-5000 is entitled to pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040 and since the pay scale of the senior Treasury Officer at Civil Lines Treasury, Allahabad carries only a pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500, therefore, the pay scale being given to the petitioner of Rs. 1200-2040 is the correct pay scale. It is further mentioned in the said order that the district level cadre of the stenographers of the treasury department have still not been merged with the regional offices cadre of stenographers or the head quarter cadres of the stenographers. However, steps have been taken for merger of the three different cadres of the stenographers and the proposal has already been sent to the State Government. It is pending for consideration. According to the petitioer the stenographers in the cadre of regional offices and headquarters are getting much higher pay scale.

A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the respondent pursuant to the order dated 03.01.2002 and 25.07.2005 regarding giving of pay scale in which it is alleged that the matter is getting active consideration of the State Government and further 6 months time would be required by the government to take final decision. It is thus clear that whatever benefit the petitioner may be entitled to each be given to him only upon merger of the cadres.

As the claim of the petitioner is pending for more than 14 years now and the proposal of the Directorate of the Treasury is pending last 6 years with the State Government, it is expected that the State Government wakes up and takes a final decision in the matter. Considering the long pendency of the matter it is directed that the State Government takes a final decision within a period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The petitioner will furnish certified copy of this order along with representation to the Principal Secretary (Finance) whereupon the steps would be taken to take a decision on the grievance of the petitioner and also the proposal of the Treasury Directorate within the above prescribed period.

With the aforesaid observations the writ petition is disposed off.

Dt. 10.11.2005

v.k.updh. (144)


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.