Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 179151 (ALL)

AMIT KUMAR GUPTA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HORTICULTURE, LUCKNOW AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/12812/2025 · 2025-11-04

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 12812 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking a direction to authority concerned for grant of minimum of the pay scale, the recommendation for which has already been made vide letters dated 15.05.2020 and 19.09.2022. 3. It is submitted that earlier petitioner had filed WRIT - A No. - 8092 of 2023, which was disposed of vide order dated 17.10.2023 directing authorities concerned to take a decision with regard to grievance of petitioner pertaining to grant of minimum of pay-scale. 4. By means of order dated 13.03.2024, petitioner's representation was rejected primarily on ground that he is no longer employed with the Department. The said order was challenged in WRIT - A No. - 2457 of 2024 and the petition was disposed of vide order dated 24.04.2024. 5. It has been submitted that in order dated 24.04.2024, this Court came to conclusion that despite assertion being made by opposite parties that petitioner had voluntarily left work, the same was belied vide letter dated 08.02.2024 issued by the District Horticulture Officer, Banda. 6. In view thereof, liberty was granted to petitioner to return to work as Daily Wager and it was directed that in case petitioner returns, the opposite parties would reinstate him on the post on which he was earlier working or on any other post on which work was available. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd. Ateeq Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Amit Kumar Gupta .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Horticulture, Lucknow And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. It is submitted that in pursuance thereof, petitioner has been permitted to join in the Department and is currently again employed as a daily wage employee but the benefit of minimum of the pay-scale still eludes him. 8. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstance and since factual aspects are required to be considered, liberty is granted to petitioner to file fresh representation before opposite party no.2 i.e. Director, Horticulture & Food Processing, 2, Sapru Marg, Lucknow. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided by authority concerned expeditiously by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks from receipt of representation of petitioner along with a certified copy of this order. 9. With aforesaid direction, the petition stands finally disposed of. November 4, 2025 kvg/- WRIA No. 12812 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench