← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/13236/2019disposed

Ajay Kumar Verma v. The Union Of India

2019-07-03Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13236 of 2019 ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Verma, son of Sri Nand Kishore Prasad, resident of Flat No. 201, Shreeya Apartment, Ara Garden Bailey Road, P.S.-Rupaspur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Ministry of Civil Aviation Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2.

The Chairman, Airport Authority of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung, Airport, New Delhi.

3.

The General Manager, Airport Authority of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung, Airport, New Delhi.

4.

The Dy. General Manager (HR), Airport Authority of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung, Airport, New Delhi.

5.

The Executive Director(HR), Airport Authority of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung, Airport, New Delhi.

6.

The Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, Eastern Region, Kolkata.

7.

The Airport Director, Airport Authority of India Jai Prakash Narayan International Airport, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the UOI :

Mr.S. D. Sanjay ( Additional Solicitor General) Mr. Kumar Priyaranjan, CGC For AAI : Mr. Dr. Pankaj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-07-2019 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 07.03.2019 passed by the Deputy General Manager (HR), Airports Authority of India whereby the representation of the petitioner after his joining on the

2/4 post has been rejected.

2. It appears that the petitioner had approached this Court along with other petitioners vide various writ petitions, the lead case being C.W.J.C. No. 21964 of 2013 for a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioners for being promoted to the post of Assistant Manager (Technical) and for payment of all consequential benefits as were granted to other similarly situated persons as per the seniority list of 2002.

3. A Bench of this Court, vide order dated 23.01.2018 held that at the time of publication of the list for promotion in the year 2002, no proceeding was pending against the petitioners and therefore there was no reason for denying them the promotion. It was also categorically directed that since the petitioners are entitled to be promoted to the post of Assistant Manager (Technical), they shall be promoted and be given all consequential benefits from the said date

3/4 including seniority and other benefits except back wages for the period from 04.07.2002 to 01.02.2006.

4. It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioners were promoted and their seniority also has been restored. It appears that petitioners had asked for the back wages which has been rejected by the respondent/Airports Authority of India.

5. The order dated 23.01.2018 is clear and categorical that the petitioner would not be entitled for the back wages from 04.07.2002 to 01.02.2006. The concerned respondent has actually passed an order in terms of the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 21964 of 2013 on 23.01.2018.

6. No interference is required with the aforesaid order.

7. Needless to state that the petitioner would be entitled to all benefits which will now accrue to him after his promotion.

4/4

8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- U