AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By way of this writ petition, petitioner has assailed the order passed by U.P. State Public Services Tribunal on 07.08.2003 in Claim Petition No. 1244 of 2001.
Brief facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Electrician in U.P. Chalchitra Nigam, which was later closed by the government. So, vide order dated 31.03.1990, the services of petitioner came to an end. The Petitioner thus assailed the said order before this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 2082 of 1990 and this Court vide its order dated 26.05.1990 issued a direction to the opposite parties to absorb the erstwhile employees of U.P. Chalchitra Nigam but the services of petitioner were not absorbed in any corporation. Thus the petitioner filed another Writ Petition No. 3614 (SS) of 1998 wherein a direction was issued to decide his representation.
In pursuance of directions so issued by this Court, petitioner''s representation was considered and rejected by competent authority vide order dated 20.11.1998. Not being satisfied, the petitioner filed Claim Petition No. 2777 of 1998 before the learned State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow, which vide its order dated 01.12.1999 directed the opposite parties to absorb the services of petitioner. Accordingly, the opposite parties relaxed the condition and gave appointment to petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs. 3200-4900/- in Cultural Directorate on the post of Electrician. After joining the said post, the petitioner claimed the fixation of pay, which was rejected vide order dated 18.01.2001. Being aggrieved, the petitioner assailed the said order before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition by passing the impugned order with a cost of Rs. 500/-. Petitioner thus being aggrieved has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
We have heard learned Counsel for parties and perused the records.
Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that in other cases, the benefits of the past services rendered in U.P. Chalchitra Nigam have already been given but the same benefits have not been made admissible in the case of petitioner. Petitioner''s services were absorbed in Cultural Directorate w.e.f. 25.03.2000 and, as such, he is entitled for fixation of salary by counting the past services.
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel justified the impugned order of the Tribunal.
On considering the rival submissions, it appears that in the U.P. Chalchitra Nigam, the basic pay of petitioner was Rs. 1030/- and with total emoluments it was Rs. 2757/-.On the other hand, in Cultural Department, a higher pay-scale of Rs. 3200-4900/- was given to the petitioner and, as such, the petitioner was placed in a better pay-scale than what was being paid in the U.P. Chalchitra Nigam.
Moreover, in the instant case, there was a gap of about 10 years between the year 1990, when the service of petitioner was terminated and in the year 2000 when the service of petitioner was absorbed and this gap cannot be compensated by granting pay protection as per the Government Order dated 06.03.1990.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefits of past services rendered in the earlier department for the purpose of pay protection etc. Thus, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of Tribunal, which is hereby affirmed.
In the result, the writ petition, being devoid of merits, is dismissed.