HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition No. 1123(S/B)02: Khushmuddin Khan S/o Sri Niyajuddin Khan, R/o ward no. 6, Khatima, Tehsil Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, ---- Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttaranchal through its Secretary, Urban Development, Dehradun, 2. The Director of Local Bodies, State of Uttaranchal, Dehradun, 3. The Commissioner, Kumaon Mandal Nainital, 4. The Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Khatima, District U.S. Nagar, 5. The Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Khatima, Distt. Udham Singh Nagar. ----Respondents. Sri B.S. Khanka, learned counsel for the petitioner, Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1,2,3. Sri Gaurav Joshi, brief holder of Sri Sandeep Tandon, Adv. for respondent nos. 4 & 5. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri B.S. Khanka, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos. 1,2 & 3, and Sri Gaurav Joshi, holding brief of Sri Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 & 5. 2. Counsel for the parties are agreed that the writ petition may be disposed of at the admission stage. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent and direction him to give salary on the post on which the petitioner is working with the Nagar Palika, Khatima. 4. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was appointed as Class IV employee vide order dated 2 07.03.2002 by the Chairman Nagar Palika, Khatima. The appointment order speaks that the petitioner is being appointed on the post, which was fell vacant on account of superannuation of one Sri Khushmuddin. Since the petitioner was not being paid salary, he preferred this writ petition and this Court on 29.08.2002 passed order that since the petitioner has been appointed by order dated 07.03.2002, contained in annexure no.1 to the writ petition, on the pay scale of Rs. 2550-55-2660- 6-3200, he shall be paid salary on the said pay-scale, if he is working. 5. In pursuance of the Court’s order dated 29.08.2002, the respondents are paying the petitioner minimum pay-scale. 6. In the counter affidavit, the stand taken by the respondent is that after the appointment letter was issued to the petitioner, someone made a complaint to the department that the appointment of the petitioner was made illegally. On receiving the complaint, the Director Local Bodies, State of Uttaranchal directed the District Magistrate, U.S. Nagar to inquire into the matter. Therefore, the inquiry is pending before the District Magistrate, U.S. Nagar, but no order has yet been passed by the District Magistrate. 7. In the circumstances narrated above, in case, the District Magistrate, after holding inquiry comes to the conclusion that the appointment of the petitioner was not made in accordance with law, the Competent Authority is free to pass appropriate orders in this regard. 8. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been provided appointment vide order dated 07.03.2002 by the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Khatima and the petitioner is still working in pursuance of the aforesaid appointment order. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that so long the 3 appointment of the petitioner is continuing, therefore the petitioner is entitled to get salary. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to make payment of salary to the petitioner in accordance with law. 10. With this observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) April 24, 2006: NCM: