IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 3899 (S/S) of 2001 (Old No. 16435/1993) Jagdish Prasad Gaur S/o Late Sri Ghanshyam R/o Public Higher Secondary School, Dhaulkhetkhal Post Office Chamethakhal District- Pauri Garhwal ------- Petitioner Versus 1. State of U.P. 2. District Inspector of Schools, Pauri, Pauri Garhwal 3. Management Committee (through its Manager), Uchhatar Madhyamik Vidhyalaya, Dhaulkhetkhal, Pauri Garhwal 4. Sri Pati Ram Devrani S/o Late Sri Jagat Ram, Principal Uchhatar Madhyamik Vidhaylaya, Dhaulkhetkhal, Pauri Garhwal ------- Respondents Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel State of the Uttarakhand for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: 1. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 2,3 and 4 to immediately give arrears of salary to the petitioner. 2. a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 4 to send the salary bills of the petitioner to respondent no. 2 for the period between September, 1990 to January, 1991 and from 14th August, 1991 to October, 1991 and further from June 1992 to August 1992. 3. to issue writ of mandamus commanding respondent no. 4 to restrict the duties of the petitioner during day hours only. 2 4. Any other writ, order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper. 5. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner. The petitioner, who was appointed as Class IV employee in the institution, is claiming salary for the Period September 1990 to January 1991, 14th August 1991 to October 1991 and June 1992 to August 1992. From perusal of the counter affidavit, it is clear that the salary bill of the petitioner for the period June 1992 to August 1992 was prepared by the Principal and was sent to the District Inspector of Schools, however, this bill was not signed by the Manager of the institution. Consequently, the District Inspector of Schools, after getting it signed by the Manager, has sent the same to Higher Authorities for payment as the payment was barred by time and was to be made to the petitioner after sanction by the authorities in the Audit Department. So far the salary of petitioner for the period September 1990 to January 1991 and 14th August 1991 to October 1991 is concerned, it is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was not present during this period and was absent without any application. Since the petitioner was absent from duty without any application for the period between September 1990 to January 1991 and 14th August 1991 to October 1991, he is not entitled to get same for the period, however, this period of absence of petitioner shall not be treated as break in the service for the purposes of post retirement benefits. However, so far as the salary 3 for the period from June 1992 to August 1992 is concerned, if it has not yet been paid to the petitioner, the respondent is directed to ensure the payment of the same for the aforesaid period. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. All the pending applications stand disposed of. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) 18.05.2007 VKS