Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1018 (ALL)

Bhanwar Sahab Singh v. State of U. P.

2016-03-18

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA

body2016
JUDGMENT Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel and Sri Abhishek Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Petitioner retired on 30th of June, 2013 from the post of Cooperative Inspector Grade-II/Assistant Block Development Officer Cooperative. Petitioner alleges that persons junior to him were granted promotion from 1990, ignoring the claim of petitioner. This fact according to petitioner was not within his knowledge and he has come to know of it, only in the year, 2013. 3. Submission is that in case notional promotion is granted to petitioner from the date such benefit was extended to petitioner's juniors then he would be able to complete qualifying service in order to enable him to receive pension. 4. Reliance has been placed upon an order of the Lucknow Bench of this Court dated 23rd of June, 2010 in Writ Petition No. 5913 (SS) of 2010 (Heera Lal Gangwar vs State of U.P. and others), which is to be following effect: - "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Shri Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.4 states that in view of earlier judgments petitioner may be granted notional promotion with effect from the date on which juniors to him were granted promotion, but he is not entitled to any arrears of salary. This notional promotion will be relevant only for pensionary benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner categorically states that he will feel fully satisfied in case the said relief is granted to him. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall be given notional promotion with effect from the date on which juniors to him were promoted. However, he will not be entitled to any arrears of salary on the basis of this notional promotion. This notional promotion shall be taken into consideration only for the purposes of pensionary benefits. Learned Standing Counsel has got no objection to the above order. It is also clarified that this order is only for the petitioner of the present writ petition i.e. Heera Lal Gangwar." 5. In respect of petitioner's greivance he has already approached respondent No. 2 and it is stated that no decision has yet been taken. 6. Learned Standing Counsel has got no objection to the above order. It is also clarified that this order is only for the petitioner of the present writ petition i.e. Heera Lal Gangwar." 5. In respect of petitioner's greivance he has already approached respondent No. 2 and it is stated that no decision has yet been taken. 6. Considering the facts, noticed above, it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, requiring respondent No. 2, to examine the claim of petitioner, by means of a reasoned and speaking order to be passed, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. All consequential action shall be taken accordingly.