IN THE  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                  CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION                   

I.A. No. 7 In                  CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5448 OF 1998   

  Vidhyadhar Sharma ..   Appellant(s)

                    Versus

State of UP & Ors. ..   Respondent(s)                           

      WITH

        I.A. No. 3 In CIVIL APEPAL NO. 5452 OF 1998                                  O R D E R

By these two applications filed in civil appeal Nos. 5448 and 5452 of 1998,  

the applicant has prayed for the following directions :  

i) fix the seniority of the applicant/appellant in accordance with the  order dated 26.2.2001 passed by the Hon'ble  Supreme Court in Contempt Petition  Nos. 57-58 of 2001 titled "Vidhya Dhar Sharma vs. G.B. Patyanak and Others";

ii) direct the respondents to regularize the applicant/appellant to the  post  of  Medical  Officer  (community  Health)  as  the  respondents  regularised  the  remaining similarly circumstanced adhoc Medical Officers (Community Health);

iii) direct  the  respondents  to  pay  the  arrears  of  salary  to  the  applicant/appellant w.e.f. February, 1997 till 07.11.2002;

iv) any other or further order which this Hon'nle Court deems fit and  proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of  the applicant/appellant and against the respondents.

../2-

: 2 :

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned  counsel  for  the  applicant  states  that  since  the  services  of  the  

applicant have already been regularised  only the issues with regard to fixation of  

seniority and payment of arrears of  salary survive for consideration.   

Mr. Dinesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents  

submits that the entire amount of salary due to the applicant w.e.f. 8th November,  

2000, has since been paid.  It is urged that for the purpose of pension the date of his  

regular appointment as medical officer has been taken as  1st February, 1997,i.e., the  

date on which the services of the applicant were terminated.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant on the other hand, submits that  

for the purpose of  his  seniority,  the relevant date has to be the date of his  initial  

selection, i.e. 30th June, 1988 and not the date of  termination.  

Having examined the rival stands in the light of order dated 26th February,  

2001,  we are  of  the view that  insofar  as  the  payment of  arrears of  salary  to the  

applicant  is  concerned,  it  has been correctly paid w.e.f.  8th November, 2000 and,  

therefore, no further relief on that score can be  

..3/-

: 3 :

granted to him.   As regards the question of  the relevant date  for  the purpose  of  

fixation of his seniority, we feel that the issue is rendered academic because of the

superannuation  of  the  applicant.   Therefore,  any  direction  at  this  juncture  is  

unnecessary.   

Insofar  as  the  question  of  either   payment of  pension  or  fixation  of  the  

relevant  date  for  the  said  purpose  is  concerned,  having  glanced  through the  two  

orders dated 22nd September, 2000 and 26th February, 2001, we feel that this issue  

was not the subject matter of the said two orders and, therefore, no orders in that  

behalf are called for. If the applicant has any grievance on that account, it is open to  

him  to  take  recourse  to  an  appropriate  remedy  as  may  be  available  to  him  in  

accordance with law.

With these observations, the applications stand disposed of.  

                                       ...................J.            [ D.K. JAIN ]  

                                       ...................J.                                     [ R.M. LODHA  ]                                           

            NEW DELHI, APRIL 28, 2009.