HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11591 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Anand Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners-State and Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. By means of this writ petition the petitioner- State has challenged the judgment and order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the U.P. Public Service Tribunal in Claim Petition No. 1030 of 2024. 4. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent-claimant was appointed as Lecturer Computer in the Department of Technical Education, Government of U.P. Lucknow on 20.10.2015. It is undisputed that he is 50% disabled and a certificate to this effect is annexed at Page No. 73 of the writ petition. He was selected for appointment as 'Scientist B' at the National Informatics Center, for which he applied for being relieved with lien being maintained in the Department of Technical Education, Government of U.P. Lucknow. Such applications are made so that in the event, for some reason the Government Servant has to return Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : C.S.C., Shailendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : The Prin.Secy. Technical Education Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Sectt. And Another .....Petitioner(s) Mohit Tyagi .....Respondent(s) back to the original employer, then, he can so return and maintenance of the lien facilitates such return. However, this application dated 13.04.2022 was being processed for months and on 11.07.2022 a query was made by the Higher Officials from the sub-ordinates as to why services of the respondent-claimant had not been confirmed on the post of Lecturer Computer in spite of lapse of more than seven years. It is the case of the respondent-claimant that the National Informatics Center had issued the appointment letter to the respondent on 14.02.2022 and because of the No Objection Certificate not being granted by the earlier employer i.e. the petitioners herein, time for joining of the respondent had to be extended by the National Informatics Center several times. In spite of it, the NOC was not granted. This compelled the respondent- claimant to move an application for being relieved without maintenance of lien on the post of Lecturer Computer on 13.07.2022. This application was accepted promptly on 06.09.2022 itself and he was relieved on 08.09.2022. Thereafter, he joined the National Informatics Center on 09.09.2022, however, due to his disability, as he found that it was not convenient for him to perform his duties at the National Informatics Center, therefore, he represented on 24.06.2023 to be taken back and be allowed to join under the State Government. This application was submitted within a year of his relieving on 06.09.2022. A decision on this application was communicated vide order dated 08.05.2024 mentioning that it was not possible to do so in view of the earlier orders dated 06.09.2022 and the consequent relieving of the respondent. It is this order dated 08.05.2024 which was challenged before the Tribunal and the same has been quashed. The Tribunal has allowed the claim petition with a direction to the petitioners-State to allow the respondent- claimant to join back with continuity in service. It is not out of place to mentioned that such joining WRIA No. 11591 of 2025 2 back does not entail any financial burden upon the petitioner-State. 5. As regards the contention of Shri Anand Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners-State that it could affect the seniority of other persons, that should no be the concern of the State. No person aggrieved has come to Court as of now. If any grievance is raised in future it would be considered as per law. 6. What we notice from the facts and material on records is that after the advertisement, when the respondent-claimant, who is a disabled person, applied for grant of NOC for appearing in the examination, his application was kept pending for several months and ultimately, he had to appear in the examination without NOC being refused or granted. Nevertheless, the fact is that an appointment order was issued in February, 2022 and when he made an application that he should be relieved by maintaining his lien on his post under the State Government for the reasons already mentioned hereinabove, that was also kept pending. Further, we find that in spite of 7 years of service he was not confirmed. No reasons have been given as to why he was not confirmed, therefore, he felt harassed and wanted to shift to the National Informatics Center. Even in this process the permission for maintaining the lien was not accepted rather no order was passed on the said application and there is no plausible explanation as to why it was kept pending, therefore, in these compelling circumstances, the respondent-claimant moved the subsequent application for joining without maintaining the lien in his department that is Technical Education Department. This was done under the compulsion, as, the National Informatics Center had extended the joining time several times and was not expected to do so continuously and indefinitely, therefore, the Tribunal can not be faulted for having taken a pragmatic and equitable WRIA No. 11591 of 2025 3 view in the matter. 7. It is not the case of the petitioners-State that the post on which the respondent-claimant was working as Lecturer Computer has been filled up. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the reasons given by the Tribunal for allowing the claim petition do not require any interference in exercise of our discretionary extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India purely in the facts of this case. 8. We, accordingly, dismiss the writ petition. September 25, 2025 R.K.P. WRIA No. 11591 of 2025 4 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench