Partly allowed

Shambu Sharan Upadhayay v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2018WRIA/26186/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a contractual employee, sought dearness allowance hike denied by respondent authorities. Court dismissed merits and directed newly impleaded department head to examine grievance and report within three months.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to correct party array; direction issued to impleaded respondent No. 4 to examine grievance, call for report from respondent No. 2, and pass a reasoned order within three months.

Shambu Sharan Upadhayay Vs State of U P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26186 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Shambu Sharan Upadhayay Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhanshu Pratap Singh,Amit Kumar Singh

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

¶6

(Oral)

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that as per information available on the internet there is a Parti Bhoomi Vikas Vibhag which is headed by the Principal Secretary, Parti Bhoomi Vikas Vibhag. He prays for and is granted leave to correct the array of the parties and instead of "The State of U.P. through its Competent Authority, Bhumi Sudhar Department, U.P. at Lucknow" the respondent No. 1 should be arrayed as The State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary, Parti Bhoomi Vikas Vibhag at Lucknow.

¶8

The respondent No. 4 should also be added as Managing Director, Bhumi Sudhar Nigam. Let necessary corrections in the array of the parties be carried out during the course of the day.

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Sales in U.P. Agro State Industrial Company Limited in 1975 but he was retrenched from his services on 31.03.2009.

¶10

The U.P. Sudhar Nigam Limited launched a Scheme known as "U.P. Sodik Land Reclamation Third Project". Several persons including the petitioner were taken on contractual basis by the Bhumi Sudhar Nigam Limited and he discharged his duties honestly till date.

¶11

It is the case of the petitioner that dearness allowance of all employees including the contractual employees have been increased by the Government Order dated 19.06.2015 which is also applicable to Bhumi Sudhar Nigam Limited. Similarly, on 27.04.2017 another increase in dearness allowance was directed by the Government Order for all employees. The petitioner made several applications, but the respondent No. 2 is not paying any heed to them and he has been forced to approach this Court.

¶12

The petitioner has already made a representation on 23.08.2018, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure - 6 to this writ petition.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the case the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the newly impleaded respondent No. 4 to look into the grievance of the petitioner and call for a report from the respondent No. 2 and then pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law with a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the authority concerned.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.12.2018 LBY

Shambu Sharan Upadhayay v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambu Sharan Upadhayay 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Charan Singh and 7 Others Vs Deputy Managing Director and Corporate Development Officer, S.B.I. Mumbai and 3 Others

Chandra Bhan Singh and 6 Others Vs Deputy Managing Director and Corporate Development Officer, S.B.I., Mumbai and 3 Others

Hari Singh Baghel Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Shivji Koiri and 26 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

U.P Palika Lok Swasthya Sewa Association, Prayagraj and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Rajesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others