Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 130785 (ALL)

INDRA BHUSHAN PANDEY v. U.P. JAL NIGAM RURAL THRU. MANAGING DIRECTOR LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/3770/2025 · 2025-04-18

Rajesh Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22143 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3770 of 2025 Petitioner :- Indra Bhushan Pandey Respondent :- U.P. Jal Nigam Rural Thru. Managing Director Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Savita Jain Counsel for Respondent :- Samir Om Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madhav Om holding brief of Sri Samir Om, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed following relief : "(a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 30.10.2024 issued by the Opp. party No. 3 as well as order dated 28.11.2024 issued by the Opp. party No. 4, the true copies of which are contained as Annexure No. 1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition. (b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Opp. parties to revise the salary of the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs. 825-1200 which is the pay scale of Work Agent, expeditiously or within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. (c) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Opp. parties to refund the amount which has been deducted from the salary of the petitioner in the garb of impugned order dated 30.10.2024 and 28.11.2024 within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court." 3. This Court has passed order dated 8.4.2025, which reads as under : "1. Heard Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri . 2. Sri Samir Om, learned counsel has accepted notices on behalf of the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Madhav Om, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Samir Om has put in appearance on their behalf. 3. Ms.Savita Jain has stated that the impugned orders dated 30.10.2024 and 28.11.2024 (Annexure Nos.1 & 2) are patently illegal and unwarranted inasmuch as the salary of the petitioner has been reduced for no cogent reasons. However, vide letter dated 16.01.2025 (Annexure No.6) addressing to the Executive Engineer, the Chief Engineer has directed to re-audit the facts relating to the salary of the petitioner and there may be likelihood to make correction of earlier irregularities, but till date, no decision has been taken by the Competent Authority. The petitioner is to retire in the month of June, 2025 and on account of the impugned orders, he is getting less salary than he is entitled for. 4. Sri Madhav Om has stated that he has no instructions, therefore, some short time may be given him to seek specific instructions. 5. List this case on 18.04.2025 as fresh to enable Sri Om to seek complete instructions in the matter. 6. On that date, this case may be taken up immediately after fresh cases." 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party has stated on the basis of instructions that before passing the impugned orders the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the petitioner. He has also submitted that in terms of the letter dated 16.1.2025 (Annexure no. 6) the exercise of re-audit relating to re-fixation of salary to the petitioner may be undertaken and in such exercise if any irregularity is found, the same may be corrected. 5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, since the impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned orders are hereby quashed remanding back the issue to the competent authority to pass appropriate orders in favour of the petitioner and if irregularity is found in the course of re-audit the amount may be refunded to the petitioner as has been deducted from the salary of the petitioner in the garb of impugned orders within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order of this Court. 6. In view of the aforesaid terms the writ petition is allowed. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.] Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Om Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench