High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Details
BAHADUR LAL versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS
Case Law Search
Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation
Judgement
Bahadur Lal v. State Of U.P. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 1385 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6113 (22 November 2005)
|
Court No. 34
Special Appeal No. 1385 of 2005
Bahadur Lal
Vs.
State of U.P. and others
~~~~
Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.
This Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 17th October, 2005 of a learned Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.219 of 1999. The petition was filed for a direction upon the respondents to pay arrears of salary along with the consequential benefits and 18% interest.
The petitioner was working as a Seenchpal. Pursuant to the show cause notice dated 13th August, 1982 issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why his services may not be terminated as he had remained absent for a substantially long period, the petitioner submitted a reply and thereafter the services of the petitioner were terminated and a notice to this effect was published in the Newspapers on 30th December, 1982. It was only in the year 1995 that the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in this Court to challenge the aforesaid order. The Court by its judgment and order dated 1st December, 1995 declined to issue the directions on account of inordinate delay and laches on the part of the petitioner but opportunity was given to the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer for examining the grievances. Subsequently, the Executive Engineer by the order dated 15th July 1997 permitted the petitioner to submit his joining report but directed that salary would be paid to the petitioner only from the date of joining and no salary shall be paid for the earlier period on the principles of ''no work no pay'. Thereafter the petitioner submitted a representation dated 12th May, 1988 claiming salary even for the period he had not worked and when no orders were passed, he filed the petition out of which the present Special Appeal arises. The learned Judge dismissed the petition holding that there was no illegality in the order dated 15th July, 1992. It was observed in the judgment that the aforesaid order permitting the petitioner to join was with a specific condition that the petitioner would not be entitled to any pay for the period he had not worked and the petitioner had accepted the said order and also joined pursuant to it. This apart, the learned Judge was also of the opinion that the petitioner had not submitted any explanation for the delay in claiming the relief since the petition had been filed after a lapse of about 14 years claiming the relief for the period he had not worked.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the materials available on record. In our opinion the learned Judge was justified in dismissing the petition as the petitioner had joined pursuant to the order dated 15th July, 1997 unconditionally and he cannot now be permitted to agitate the issue relating to arrears of salary for the period he had not worked, particularly when such arrears were claimed after a period of 14 years.
The Special Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
There shall be no orders as to costs.
Date: 22.11.2005
GS-(718)
Copyright
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
Advertisement
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 |
Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.
Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.