Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 552 (JK)

Kanya Lal Koul v. UOI

2017-08-04

SANJEEV KUMAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working with respondent No. 2 as Pharmacist and was superannuated on 31st October, 2009. Thereafter, he received his leave salary from respondent No. 2. His grievance is that having rendered eighteen years of service, he was not given any functional promotion to the higher post, but was only granted one in-situ promotion in terms of SRO 18 dated 19th January, 1998. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the grant of in-situ promotion, the salary of the petitioner was re-fixed with reference to the pre-revised scale on 31st December, 1995 in terms of Rule 13 (3) of Revised Pay Rules, 1998 and the periodical increment, which had become due to him on 1st January, 1996 was not taken into consideration. Learned counsel submits that the salary of the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 5150/- instead of Rs. 5300/- on 1st January, 1996. 3. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner made a detailed representation to the respondents for redressal of his grievance, but the same was not considered, however, respondent No. 1 vide impugned Communication dated 08th July, 2010 rejected the case of the petitioner. It is this order of respondent No. 1, the petitioner is aggrieved of. However, when the matter was taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would be satisfied, if the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No. 2 to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the averments made in the representation and convey its decision to the respondent No. 1, who shall re-consider the matter and to take a final decision in the matter in the time bound manner. 4. Ordered accordingly. The respondent No. 2 shall take the decision within two weeks and convey it to the respondent No. 1, who shall re-consider the issue, if the same is warranted under law. 5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of alongwith connected MPs. 6. Copy of this order under the seal and signatures of the Bench Secretary of this Court be supplied to the learned counsel for the respondents.