CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Dr. Gyendra Tripathi vs State of Uttarakhand & others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 29 June 2017 · Citation: (2017) 06 UK CK 0053

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. Bist, Alok Singh
CASE NUMBER
380 of 2013
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 373 words
1.

Rejoinder affidavit is accepted on record. The misc. application (I.A. No. 5006/2015), made therefor, stands disposed of.

2.

During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he does not want to press the other reliefs sought in the writ petition except prayer no. 4. The prayer no. 4 reads as under:

"iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 and 4 to pay the arrear of salary treating the petitioner as per norms and conditions of the service formulated by National Council of Teacher Education within a month."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has worked for certain period for which salary has not been paid to him so far. Further, payment of arrears of salary has also not been made. Learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer and prayed that the writ petition may be disposed of by permitting the

petitioner to submit a fresh representation ventilating his grievances before the respondent no. 3 and the respondent no. 3 may be directed to decide the representation of the petitioner at the earliest.

4.

Learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is innocuous and the respondents have no objection in case such direction is issued and the representation of the petitioner shall be decided in accordance with law.

5.

Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation giving details of the period he has worked and the arrears of salary which is due before the respondent no. 3 within a period of two weeks from today. In case such representation is filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period, same shall be decided by the respondent no. 3, in accordance with law, within a period of one month from the date of filing of representation along with the certified copy of this judgment. In case it is found that petitioner has worked but payment has not been made to him, in that event, the payment shall be made to the petitioner for the period he has worked.