IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Siddharth, J.
Vimal Kumar Pandey – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. And Others – Respondents
WRIT -A No. -18523 of 2021
Decided On : 30-05-2022
Dying-in-Harness Rules - Service Benefits - 22.10.2021 - The petitioner, appointed as an Assistant Teacher untrained grade under Dying-in-Harness Rules, sought quashing of an order refusing to grant bonus, increments, selection grade, and suspension allowance. The court found that the petitioner's repeated harassment and illegal suspension and termination orders were mala fide, and there was no evidence of misconduct. The impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to pay the petitioner his entitled benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, appointed as an Assistant Teacher untrained grade under Dying-in-Harness Rules, faced repeated illegal suspension and termination orders. The impugned order refused to grant the petitioner's service benefits due to breaks in service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was repeatedly subjected to harassment and that the suspension and termination orders against the petitioner were illegal and mala fide. There was no evidence of misconduct by the petitioner.
Issues: Repeated illegal suspension and termination orders, denial of service benefits due to breaks in service, and harassment by the Committee of Management.
Ratio Decidendi: The appointment of the petitioner under Dying-in-Harness Rules was substantive and could not be terminated without recourse to departmental inquiry and opportunity of hearing. Mere implication in false and illegal proceedings not resulting in any punishment cannot be a ground for denying the petitioner's claims.
Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to ensure payment of the petitioner's entitled benefits within eight weeks, with the petitioner becoming entitled to additional interest if the order is not complied with in time. The writ petition was allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the impugned order dated 22.10.2021 passed by Basic Education Officer, Auraiya, respondent no.3, refusing to grant bonus, increments, selection grade and suspension allowance to the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for directing the aforesaid respondent to grant bonus and increment from 22.12.1997; selection grade from 2007 and arrears of salary from 22.1.1997 to 22.12.2002 with regard to untrained grade and make payment of interest at the rate of 10 % on the delayed payment of the aforesaid amount.
3. The brief facts of the petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher untrained grade under Dying-in-Harness Rules on 27.10.1997 in Pandit Nehru Madhyamik Vidyalay, Bhararipur, Auraiya, a duly aided and recognized institution. The respondent no.3, Basic Education Officer, Auraiya, by the order dated 30.5.1998, terminated the services of the petitioner without following any procedure prescribed under law but by the order dated 09.11.19998, the Joint Director of Education (Basic), Kanpur Region, Kanpur, set aside the termination order, but the petitioner was not allowed to join the institution. Hence he preferred a Writ Petition No. 43219 of 1998, wherein interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, Head Master of the institution filed Writ Petition No. 49586 of 1999 challenging the same order dated 09.11.1998. Both petitions were clubbed together and while the petition of the petitioner was allowed, the petition of Head Master was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.9.2004. The Head Master of the institution also preferred a Special Appeal against the judgement and order dated 13.09.2004, which was dismissed and thereafter after filing of contempt petition, the petitioner was permitted to join his duties in the institution. He was permitted to join, but never granted the benefits of trained grade and other benefits and hence he filed Writ Petition No. 67145 of 2006, which was allowed by the order dated 25.01.2010 directing the respondents to grant trained grade to the petitioner. The aforesaid order of this government dated 25.01.2010 was subjected to Special Appeal and it is still pending.
4. The Principal of the institution thereafter suspended the petitioner, which was stayed by this Court and thereafter termination order was passed against the petitioner, which was disapproved by the Basic Education Officer by the order dated 05.3.2019. Thereafter petitioner was allowed to work. With regard to his grievance, the petitioner represented before the respondents, but nothing was done. Hence he approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 7674 of 2021, which was disposed of vide order dated 02.8.2021 directing the Basic Education Officer to examine the grievance of the petitioner. In pursuance of the aforesaid direction of this Court, impugned order dated 22.10.2021 was passed by Basic Education Officer, Auraiya,, whereby the entire claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that on account of repeated breaks in service of the petitioner from 22.12.1997, he can not be permitted to have any bonus, increment, suspension allowance or selection grade on 10 years of satisfactory service since he never had 10 years of satisfactory service. Hence the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 & 3, Joint Director of Education (Basic), Kanpur Region, Kanpur and Basic Education Officer, Auraiya, wherein it has been stated that the service of the petitioner was repeatedly interrupted on account of disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, he cannot be granted relief prayed. The government order dated 28.10.2021 provides that the employees against whom departmental proceedings or criminal case is pending shall not be entitled to bonus till
The appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules was substantive and could not be terminated without due process. Mere implication in false and illegal proceedings not resulting in any punishment cannot ....
The court held that interruptions in the respondent's service were caused by deliberate and mala fide actions of the institution and the State authorities were also held responsible for not preventin....
Employees forced out of employment due to illegal actions of the employer are entitled to payment for the period of forced unemployment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to terminal benefits upon superannuation and the consideration of contributions made by the petitioner during his service.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of prior approval for the termination of a Group 'D' employee, as mandated by Rule 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Scho....
Upon reinstatement after suspension, the appointing authority must determine subsistence allowance and recognize the entire service length for benefits, not treating reinstatement as a fresh appointm....
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.