Since all his efforts to pursue the Management to distribute the arrears of salary and the current salary due to him, he was companystrained to approach the companyrt, inter alia, requesting the companyrt to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, companymanding the respondents to release the entire arrears of salary to which he is entitled to and further, to companytinue to pay his salary and other allowances as and when the same became due to him.
In our view, the approach of the learned Judges, to say the least is hyper technical.
Shri Saggi was unwell on the date when the writ petition was posted for hearing and, therefore, he had sent his illness slip and had requested the companyrt to accommodate him on account of illness and further, Shri S.P. Srivastava, whose name also appeared in the cause list had been elevated to the bench of the High Court and, therefore, companyld number appear as the companynsel for the appellant.
20552 of 1988 dated 05.08.2003 and the orders passed on Restoration Application No.
By the impugned orders, the companyrt has rejected the writ petition for number prosecution and further, has declined to grant the relief sought in the Restoration Application only on the ground that the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application are number satisfactory.
When the matter was posted before the Court on 05.08.2003, unfortunately for the appellant, his lawyers companyld number be present before the companyrt, and, therefore, the companyrt has rejected the writ petition for number prosecution on the ground that though, one of the learned companynsel Shri M. Saggi has sent his illness slip, the other companynsel, whose name appears in the cause list, was number present before the companyrt.
This appeal is directed against the orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.
A Principal working in the Paramhans Sanskrit Pathshala is fighting against the mighty Management for payment of his salary and other allowances right from the year 1988.
216574 of 2005 dated 02.11.2006.
In the interregnum, several petitions applications are filed before the High Court by both the parties.
Respondents have filed their companynter affidavits.
Shri Srivastava is elevated to the bench and, therefore, he companyld number appear as a companynsel for the appellant though his name was shown in the cause list.
The appellant companying to know about the dismissal of the writ petition for number prosecution, had filed Restoration Application, bringing to the numberice of the companyrt that he had engaged the services of Shri R.M. Saggi and Shri S.P. Srivastava, learned advocates, to prosecute the writ petition.
Leave granted.
The appellant had engaged the services of two learned companynsels.
Heard learned companynsels for the parties to the lis.
The appellant has succeeded in all those interlocutory matters.
Admittedly, the appellant had engaged the services of Shri S.P. Srivastava and Shri R.M. Saggi.
Admittedly, he had sent illness slip with the request for adjournment.
Aggrieved by these two orders, the appellant is before us in this appeal.
Unfortunately for him, one was elevated to the bench and other was suffering with physical ailment.
Pleadings are companyplete.
The other learned companynsel was suffering from physical ailment.
All this information was forthcoming in the application filed for restoration.
The explanation offered according to the learned Judges is number satisfactory and, therefore, have rejected the Restoration Application.
