Awadesh Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P.and Others

Rakesh Sharma, J.—Heard Sri O.P.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite parties.

The petitioner has assailed the order dated 14.4.2002 passed by District Magistrate, Kheri rejecting the claim of the petitioner and ordering for his disengagement from services. The petitioner was initially appointed as Seasonal Collection Amin. He was engaged with effect from 9th January, 1999. By the year 2001, he had completed six Fasli Seasons. He was posted in tahsildar Sadar, Lakhimpur Kheri at the time disengagement from services. The petitioner has placed a detailed chart, copy of which is Annexure No.3, duly verified by the Tahsildar, Lakhimpur Kheri. In the said chart, details of collections and recovery percentage, etc. have been indicated. As per petitioner, his collection was 72 per cent in the year 1999, thereafter it was 74 per cent, 86 per cent and 74 per cent in the years preceding his disengagement for services. His case is that juniors to him having lesser percentage of recovery have been regularly appointed while the petitioner has been excluded from consideration. The names of such juniors are Rakesh Srivastava, Dharmendra Pratap Singh etc. The details of their performance have been given in various Annexures annexed with the writ petition.

Learned Standing Counsel has resisted the writ petition. He has submitted that the performance of the petitioner was not satisfactory. In Paras 3, 5 and 6, of the counter affidavit a plea has been taken that the petitioner had made a very low recovery of 54 per cent. His work was not satisfactory hence he could not be regularized. Due to low recoveries and various other reasons, the petitioner was not found and suitable for allowing him regular appointment as per Rule 5 of U.P. Collection Amin Service Rules of 1974.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The unchallenged document i.e. Annexure No.3 to the writ petition is a certificate issued by Tahsildar, Lakhimpur Kheri dated 1.3.2002 which indicates the petitioner Sri Awadesh Kumar Pandey''s recovery percentage was 72 per cent during the period from 9th January, 1999 to 31.3.1999; It was 74 per cent in Second fasli i.e. from 22nd May, 1999 to 21st September, 1999. In third fasli, his percentage was 86 per cent and thereafter from 18.11.2000 to 15.2.2001, it was 76 per cent. It is evident from details duly verified by the Tahsildar, Lakhimpur Kheri that the petitioner''s recovery percentage was certainly about 70 per cent. Moreover, in the counter affidavit, bald and sweeping reply has been given without substantiating the plea of low recoveries. As per record, documents submitted by the petitioner, it was not 54 per cent as alleged by the respondents. The genuineness of the document as contained in Annexure No.3 to the writ petition has not been challenged in the counter affidavit by filing any other document filed by respondents. In view of above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner''s recovery percentage was above 70 per cent. Ex facie, this was a case of nonapplication of mind by the authority. Even in the short counter affidavit dated 1.11.2002, filed by Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, District Magistrate, Kheri in contempt petition 1098 (C) of 2002, no details have been furnished before the Court to substantiate the allegation of low recovery against the petitioner. It is silent on this point. The petitioner case is covered under Rule 5 of the U.P. Collection Amins Service Rule, 1974. He has completed four fasli seasons and his recovery is above 70 per cent during these four fasli seasons. He, therefore, deserves to be appointed on regular basis.

In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. A writ of certiorari is issued quashing the impugned order dated 14.4.2002 passed by District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri. The order dated 26.6.2003, contained in Annexure No.15 to the writ petition is also quashed. Further writ of mandamus is issued commanding the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner on the post of Collection Amin on regular basis from the date, his juniors Rakesh Kumar Srivastava and Dharmendra Pratap Singh were appointed. The petitioner shall be entitled for all consequential benefits, salary etc. as have been provided to his juniors.

(Petition allowed)