Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In this case of RADHEY SHYAM PANDEY VERSUS KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, The appellant was appointed as IIIrd grade clerk in the year 1963 and he was confirmed as IInd grade clerk vide Order dated 23.10.1969. Thereafter, the appellant was appointed as a stenographer on ad-hoc basis on 12.12.1969. Later, the appellant was reverted as clerk on 05.07.1973 and he continued to work in that post. The appellant also availed leave from 19.09.1973 to 24.08.1974 during which period he was not paid salary. The period during which he worked i.e. between 01.01.1976 and 30.11.1987, according to the appellant he worked as a stenographer; but he was paid salary only as a IInd Grade clerk.
When the appellant made the representation to pay his arrears and allowances as the stenographer, the same was not considered. By Order dated 16.12.1988, the Administrator, Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur, appointed the appellant as the Stenographer with retrospective effect from 01.07.1975. As noted earlier, the appellant prayed for the arrears of salary and other consequential benefits. U.P. Public Service Tribunal No.II, Jawahar Bhawan, Lucknow, vide Order dated 13.11.1991 allowed the application of the appellant and directed the authorities to pay him arrears of salary as payable to stenographer. Being aggrieved, the Kanpur Development Authority preferred writ petition before the High Court. The High Court while pointing out that the State Government being necessary party is not impleaded, set aside the order of the Tribunal and approved the order of the Kanpur Development Authority.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is before us. Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the High Court, the supreme court held “Since the High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal mainly on the ground that the State Government has not been impleaded as a party in the proceedings, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. The State of Uttar Pradesh is ordered to be impleaded as the third respondent in C.M.W.P. No.6637 of 1992 and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for consideration of the matter afresh. C.M.W.P. No.6637 of 1992 shall stand restored to its original number. We request the High Court to afford sufficient time to the appellant to file additional counter affidavit and after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to both the parties dispose of the matter at an early date preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order
86540
103860
630
114
59824