Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
IRSHAD ALI
Kailash Nath – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Appointment Personnel Lko – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
IRSHAD ALI, J.
1. Heard Dr. L.P. Misra, learned counsel for the applicants alongwith Sri Tarun Mishra, Advocate and Sri Pankaj Khare, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This review application has been filed against the order dated 03.08.2023 passed in Writ - A No. 962 of 2010 - " Ram Kishan and Ors. vs State of UP ".
3. The grounds taken by the petitioners are as follows :
(i) while passing the judgment under review the relief clauses (f) & (h), though noted in para-2 of the impugned judgment have escaped the consideration of this Hon'ble Court which has resulted in miscarriage of justice to the Petitioners.
(ii) the petitioners were absorbed as class IV employees in the establishment of U.P. Civil Secretariat vide order dated 04.04.2012 (Annexure 47 to the writ petition brought on record through amendment) in consequence of the "U.P. Absorption of Surplus Employees of Uptron India Ltd. in Government Service Rules 2011" enforced w.e.f. 20.12.2011 and the consequential Government order dated 20.12.2011 notified vide notification dated 20.12.2011 issued in exercise of empowerment flowing from these Rules specifying the procedure and conditions of absorption but the judgeme
The court reaffirmed the right to equitable treatment in employment, necessitating the re-evaluation of absorption-related pay and benefits for employees absorbed under the U.P. Absorption Rules.
Absorption conditions in service law restrict past service benefits, emphasizing that claims must align with statutory stipulations, thus petitions challenging their constitutionality are unfounded.
The court upheld that differential treatment in service absorption timelines does not violate constitutional rights as long as prior benefits remain intact.
Absorption rights for retrenched employees are contingent upon participation in litigation; non-parties are not entitled to benefit from judicial decisions of previous cases.
Absorption of contract labour on an 'as-is-where-is' basis excludes claims for prior service benefits; delay and laches bar belated attempts to assert such claims.
An employee's service cannot be deemed broken due to the employer's failure to absorb them properly, violating natural justice principles; service must be counted for pension and related benefits.
Past service counts towards pension eligibility for full-time employees despite previous contractual status, aligning with government policy.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
