Disposed

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2018WRIA/22820/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Single Judge dismissed a writ petition regarding salary arrears by directing the petitioner to approach the Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965, remitting the grievance for decision on merits without adjudicating the veracity of the claims.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus issued to the Registrar to decide the representation on merits within four months from the date of receipt.

Rakesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 22820 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Rakesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- D.K.Ojha,Anil Kumar Pal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

The petitioner claims that he was working as a clerk in the Farmer Papsara Cooperative Society Ltd. Vikas Khand Joya, District Amroha. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that salary of the petitioner has not been paid from March 2016 to August 2018. He also contends that some terminal dues of the petitioner have not been paid to him after his superannuation.

¶6

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner has alternative and efficacious remedy before the competent authority under section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid proposition of law. He submits that petitioner does not wish to press the instant writ petition and the reliefs claimed therein at this stage. The learned counsel for the petitioner recast the relief. The petitioner is willing to approach the competent authority under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. He further submits that the petitioner has approached this court directly. The period of limitation has expired. He further submits that the period of limitation be enlarged.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel does not have any serious objection to the aforesaid prayer.

¶9

In view of the aforesaid facts, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending. With consent of the parties, the writ petition is being finally disposed of at the admission stage.

¶10

In such view of the fact, the matter is remitted back to the Registrar, Cooperative Society U.P. Lucknow or any other the competent authority designated under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 to decide matters under the said provision. It is open to the petitioner to make a representation regarding his grievance of non payment of salary and retiral dues to the Registrar, Cooperative Society U.P. Lucknow. In case the Registrar is not the competent authority he shall forthwith forward the representation to the competent authority under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. The said representation shall be made within a period of one month.

¶11

A mandamus is issued to the Registrar, Cooperative Society U.P. Lucknow or whichever the authority is duly designated under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 to decide the representation of the petitioner on merits within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along-with copy of the representation containing the details of his grievance. In case the representation is made in the stipulated period of one month, the authority deciding the matter shall not go into the question of delay.

¶12

The Court has not gone into the veracity of the assertions in the writ petition nor has the claim of the petitioner been judged on merits. It is for the competent authority to do so after independent application of mind.

¶13

The writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶14

Order Date :- 25.10.2018

¶15

Pramod

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.I.C. Officers Association Civil Lines Kanpur and Another Vs Union of India and Another

Vipin Kumar Vs Prathama Bank through Its Chairman, Moradabad and 2 Others

Maya Tripathi Vs Union of India and Another

Rajveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajendra Kumar Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others