The court directed the second respondent to decide the petitioner's representation regarding retrenchment benefits within four weeks, clarifying that it did not examine the merits of the claim.
Respondent No. 2 directed to decide petitioner's representation within four weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 16
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21292 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shiva Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner claims to be an erstwhile employee of U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd.(hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). The Corporation was wound up in the year, 1999. The petitioner was a retrenched employee of the said Corporation and claims to be entitled to certain benefits under 'The Uttar Pradesh Absorption of Retrenched Employees of Government or Public Corporations in Government Service Rule, 1991'. The petitioner has submitted a representation to the respondent no. 2 in this regard.
The respondent no. 2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. The representation of the petitioner shall be decided by respondent no. 2 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a fresh copy of the representation.
It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim of the petitioner. It is for the respondent no. 2 or the competent authority to apply its mind independently on the same and pass an order in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 3.10.2018 Dhananjai
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authority should decide the petitioner's representation under the UP Absorption Rules within four weeks.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shiva
State Of U.P.
Second Respondent
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
