Center of Indian Trade Union v. Executive Director All India Institute of Medical Science

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

2 4 t h DECEMBER, 2 0 2 4

W r it Pet it ion No. 3 3 9 1 of 2 0 2 4 ( M/ S)

Center of Indian Trade Union Through its State General Secretary and Others

...Petitioners

Ver su s

Executive Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh and Others

…Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr. M.C Pant, Advocate

(through video conferencing).

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Lalit Sharma,

Nos.1 to 4

Advocate.

Hon 'ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a,J.

The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers : - "(I) Issue writ, rule or direction in the nature of certiorarified mandamus by quashing the order dated 14th October, 2024 (Annexure No. 1) passed by the CGIT-II, New Delhi and declaring the same as arbitrary, perverse and bad in law and quash the same along with its effect and operation and allow the application in toto or in alternate direct the AIIMS to allow the benefit of the increased salary and arrears etc. according to the decision of 4th Standing Finance Committee keeping in view the facts highlighted in the body of the petition or to mold the relief appropriately otherwise the

petitioners will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

(II) Issue any other writ rule or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(III) Award cost of petition."

2 .

Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, has contended that the petitioners are contractual employees of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh. The Standing Finance Committee of AIIMS, Rishikesh has taken a decision to increase the salary of the contractual employees (Agenda no.12/ 03). 3 .

Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, has contended that the Executive Director of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, the respondent no.1, has not taken any decision on the recommendation of the said Standing Finance Committee. Therefore, a representation dated

01.01.2024 (page no.88) was submitted by the petitioners to the respondent no.1.

The said representation is still pending. 4 .

Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, has requested to decide the present writ petition by directing the respondent no.1 to decide the petitioners' representation dated 01.01.2024. 5 .

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, has sought six weeks' time to decide the petitioners' representation from

the date of production of certified copy of this order. 6 .

With the consent of both the parties, the present writ petition (WPMS No.3391 of 2024) is disposed of directing the respondent no.1 Executive Director to decide the petitioners' representation dated

01.01.2024 by reasoned and speaking order, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, but in accordance with rules / regulations. The petitioners will be at liberty to raise all their contentions before the respondent no.1 Executive Director. 7 .

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of this case.

_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt: 24.12.2024 Shiv/

SHIV PRASAD DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=acdf10a01e98b19449a7dc3beb4e294826f 188e8btib97f5b563a10cdbc9a7e37, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=4CD0F168562014610493BB96ADC0F 2DE74454B24EE89DAA5FC5D31E01760E37D, cn=SHIV PRASAD Date: 2024.12.24 19:51:15 +05'30'