Allowed

Shiv Singh v. State of U.P. and 02 Others

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2018WRIA/10490/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dealt with the cancellation of a promotion order issued to a Class-IV employee without reasons or an opportunity of hearing. The Court, invoking principles of natural justice, quashed the cancellation order and directed the petitioner to continue on the post.

What did the court decide?

Order cancelling the promotion dated 3.4.2018 is quashed. Petitioner is allowed to continue on the promoted post.

Shiv Singh Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10490 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Shiv Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 02 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Petitioner was a Class-IV employee, who was promoted under 20% promotion quota on the post of Driver. Promotion order was issued in favour of the petitioner on 27th June, 2015. This order was challenged before this Court by filing a writ petition, in which initially an interim order was granted, but the writ petition ultimately was dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioner appears to have approached the authority for allowing him to be reinstated, once the stay order was vacated and the writ petition was dismissed, but the promotion order itself has been cancelled. Aggrieved by it, petitioner is before this Court.

¶6

Perusal of the order would go to show that absolutely no reasons have been disclosed as to why the order of promotion is being cancelled. No opportunity of hearing has otherwise been given to the petitioner. Once the order of promotion had been given effect to and the petitioner had been allowed to join, it was not open for the respondents to have cancelled the promotion order in the manner as has been done herein.

¶7

While entertaining the writ petition, this Court had allowed time to learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions on 24th April, 2018. The matter was again adjourned on two subsequent occasions, but learned Standing Counsel states that despite repeated intimation sent, the concerned authority has not responded. In such circumstances, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances, noticed above, as the order of promotion is not shown to be bad for any reason and no opportunity has otherwise been afforded to the petitioner, and as such the order cancelling promotion is found to be violative of the principles of natural justice. Order dated 3.4.2018 is, accordingly, quashed.

¶9

Petitioner shall be allowed to continue on the promoted post. It shall, however, be open for the respondents to proceed further, in accordance with law.

¶10

Writ petition, accordingly, is allowed.

¶11

Order Date :- 6.7.2018 Anil

Shiv Singh v. State of U.P. and 02 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Singh v. State of U.P. and 02 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Babu Vs State of U.P. and 04 Others

Charan Singh Tomar Vs State of U.P. 4 Others

Mohammad Naved Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Shahin Bi Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Sohan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Yogesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others