Satya Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Govt. of U.P., Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Court No. - 17 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8912 of 2023 Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy., Govt. Of U.P., Basic Education Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Tripathi,Bani Barua,Praveen Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Uday Veer Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶1Heard Sri Anand Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3 and 4.

¶2The petitioner is working on the post of Assistant Teacher in Deen Dayal Inter College, Nipajiya, Gaura Chauki, Gonda and his grievance is with regard to payment of interest on the delayed payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner on

12.12.2022 and 09.10.2023.

¶3It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the amount which has been paid to the petitioner was paid in pursuance to the order dated 13.02.2004, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1872 (S/S) of 2000 - Satya Prakash Verma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others. The petitioner claims that he is entitled to interest only from the date of order of this Court dated 13.02.2004.

¶4Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has submitted that salary was not paid to the petitioner only on account of the fact that bills were not forwarded by the Committee of Management and statement to this effect has been given by the State in Writ Petition No. 7089 (Writ-A) of 2023, which has been disposed of by means of order dated 03.10.2023 and accordingly submits that delay if any, caused with regard to payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner is on account of delay caused by Committee of Management and not on account of any delay caused by the Basic Education Officer.

¶5After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case directions are issued to the respondents to decide petitioner's representation dated

16.10.2023, expeditiously.

¶6Learned Standing Counsel has no objection in case suitable directions are issued to the competent authority to consider and decide petitioner's representation.

¶7In view of above, without entering into the merits of the case present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the District Basic Education Officer, Gonda - respondent no. 3 to consider and decide petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2023, expeditiously say within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 9.11.2023 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench