Court No. - 23 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 4319 of 2010 Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Dixit Respondent :- State Of U.P.,Thru. Secy.,Vocational & Technical Education & Petitioner Counsel :- Ramesh Pandey,Abhishek Dwivedi Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Arora,J.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged
the impugned order dated 17.5.2010, passed by Director,
Training & Employment, Lucknow whereby petitioner’s
representation regarding regularisation of his services on the
post of Instructor has been rejected. The petitioner has also
challenged the consequential order dated 11.6.2010, passed
by Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Etawah by which
recovery from his salary is sought to be made.
Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that the
petitioner was initially appointed as Instructor on 12.8.1980
on ad hoc basis. In the year 1983 certain persons junior to
petitioner were regularised. On 3.3.1993, petitioner was
granted selection grade w.e.f. 18.9.1990. However,
petitioner’s case for regularisation remained pending despite
grant of selection grade. The petitioner represented his case
for regularisation by submitting his representation dated
04.1.2000, 31.8.2002 and on 19.12.2005 but no heed was
paid. However, during pendency of matter of regularisation
of services, the petitioner was also granted two promotional
pay-scales vide order dated 21.4.2008 and 23.10.2008.
Petitioner again represented his case for regularisation on
22.3.2009. However, under orders of Finance Controller,
Directorate of Training & Employment, U. P., Lucknow, the
Joint Director, Training/Apprentices vide order dated
08.9.2009 and 16.9.2009 cancelled the orders whereby
promotional pay-scales were granted to the petitioner. Being
aggrieved, petitioner moved representation dated 12.10.2009
and when nothing was done, he filed Writ Petition No. 6813
(SS) of 2009 before this Court seeking directions for
regularisation of his services on the post of Instructor and for
grant of all consequential benefits. This Court by means of
order dated 28.10.2009 while disposing of the writ petition
directed the Director, Training and Employment, U. P.,
Lucknow to consider and decide petitioner’s representation in
accordance with law by speaking and reasoned order by
giving weightage to the recommendations of the Principal,
Govt. Industrial Training Institute, Etawah. Till the disposal
of the representation of the petitioner, the impugned orders
dated 08.9.2009, 16.9.2009 and 24.9.2009 were directed to be
kept in abeyance.
The opposite parties in compliance of the order dated
28.10.2009 rejected the petitioner’s representation for
regularisation of the services of petitioner on the ground that
at the time of initial appointment of petitioner on the post of
Instructor, he did not possess three years’ experience.
Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that more than
thirty years have passed in service but the petitioner is still
being treated as ad hoc and now an objection has been raised
regarding possessing three years’ experience at the time of his
initial appointment and in pursuance of the same direction has
been issued vide order dated 11.6.2010 for making recovery
of excess salary paid to the petitioner after grant of selection
grade and two promotional pay-scales.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon
decisions reported in (2004) 1 UPLBEC 127, State of U.P.
& others vs. State Public Services Tribunal, U.P.,
Lucknow and another, 2008 (26) LC D 1343, Sahab Saran
vs. State of U.P. & others and 1995 Supp (1) SCC 18,
Sahib Ram vs. State of Haryana & others in which it has
been held that in case the higher pay scale is paid to the
government employee on no fault on his part, the
Government shall not be entitled to recover the amount paid
to the employee.
The opposite parties may file counter affidavit within four
weeks. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within a
week thereafter. List thereafter.
In the meantime, operation and implementation of the order
dated 11.6.2010 for making recovery from salary of the
petitioner, as contained in Annexure No. 2 to the writ
petition, will be kept in abeyance.
Order Date :- 30.6.2010
ashok