The posts of Lecturers in State Medical Colleges are to be filled up by direct recruitment on the recommendation of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. The vacancies existing in the teaching cadre in the State Medical Colleges were notified to the Commission and the same were advertised in terms of an advertisement.
The respondent-petitioner submitted his application and was selected by the Commission based on an interview. The appointment order provided by the State Government specified a condition under which the petitioner was required to join the post within one month, failing which the appointment order was to be cancelled and his candidature would cease. The petitioner did not join within the stipulated period, following which another appointment order was issued posting him at the Medical College, Jhansi.
After the petitioner joined the post, he raised a claim for pay protection. The pay protection was turned down by the State Government by stating that since the petitioner had been appointed after 24.09.2015, his case would not be covered as per terms of Government Orders dated 24.09.2015, 08.07.2016 and 12.06.1998, and accordingly, he would not be entitled to the benefit of pay protection.
The Counsel for Appellants Manish Goyal (Additional Advocate General), Ashok Kumar Goyal (Additional Chief Standing Counsel) argued that the learned Single Judge has presumed that the writ petitioner had been appointed by the State Government on 26.08.2015 i.e. before 24.09.2015 when a government order was issued clarifying that the benefit of an earlier government order dated 12.06.1998 concerning pay protection would not be available to a government servant appointed by open recruitment.
The judgment of the learned Single Judge having been rendered on an incorrect factual premise cannot be legally sustained.
Counsel for Respondent Virendra Singh, A.B. Maurya argues that the petitioner had joined the post of Lecturer at the State Medical College, Jhansi, according to the appointment order dated 20.09.2016, he had initially been granted appointment in terms of an appointment order dated 26.08.2015 which was prior in time to the issuance of the government order dated 24.09.2015. The benefit of pay protection could not have been denied to him.
The court decided that the writ petitioner, cannot claim the benefit of pay protection based on the previous appointment order offering appointment at Azamgarh. The claim sought to be raised by the respondent-petitioner based on the earlier appointment cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the offer of appointment in terms of the said appointment order was never acted upon. The position concerning the entitlement of the appellant for getting pay protection was made clear by issuing the Notification stipulating therein that an employee of the State Government undertaking selected for the post in the Central Government on direct recruitment basis would be entitled to pay protection upon appointment in the Central Government. The appellant having joined the MES, Ministry of Defence before the aforesaid date was not entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid notification which was issued much after his joining date and, therefore, the benefit of the aforesaid notification is not available to the appellant. Counsel appearing for the respondent has not been able to dispute the aforesaid factual position concerning the writ petitioner had not accepted the earlier appointment order in terms of which he had been appointed as Lecturer at the Medical College, Azamgarh, and that it was only according to the subsequent appointment order that the petitioner accepted the offer of appointment and joined the post of Lecturer at the Medical College, Jhansi.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.