Gyanendra Dutt Shukla vs State of U.P.and others

Rajiv Sharma, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 3 and Sri Rakesh Kumar, who appears on behalf of opposite party No.4.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the controversy involved in judgments and orders passed in writ petition no. 4419 (SS) of 1996, 6398 (SS) of 2000, 3358 (SS) of 2000, 4570 (SS) of 2000, 6036 (SS) of 2001 and in Special Appeal No. 184 (SB) of 2000 is identical to this writ petition, the writ petition may be disposed of accordingly.

Writ Petition is therefore disposed of finally with the direction that the benefit of judgment and order dated 3.5.1995 passed in writ petition no. 13240 of 1990 and of the order passed in writ petition No. 4419 (SS) of 1996 will be made available to the petitioner also. The petitioner also be given notional promotion with effect from the date the persons junior to him have been given notional promotion. Opposite parties shall also fix petitioner''s pension w.e.f. 18.4.1990 but he will not be entitled for any arrears of salary.