SUDHIR AGARWAL
LAL PRATAP SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent
Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 13.9.2002 of the Joint Secretary, U.P. Government, Lucknow and consequential order dated 29.5.2003 of the Excise Commissioner, U.P., Allahabad whereby he has been denied revised pension as a result of his notional promotion on higher posts from back date in higher pay scales.
3. The facts giving rise to the present dispute, in brief, are as under :
4. The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Clerk in the Excise Department of State of U.P. on 26.10.1971 and confirmed on the said post on 1.4.1975. In the Excise Department, Junior Clerk and Senior Clerk were posted in the subordinate offices as well as in the Headquarters. The respondents were maintaining distinction in respect to pay scale and status of the said clerks posted in subordinate offices qua those posted in Head Officer though they were discharging same duties. Further vide U.P. Excise Department Ministerial Service Rules, 1980, no distinction was made in respect of seniority, promotion etc. amongst the clerks posted in subordinat
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.