Single judge discretionary order directed respondent to decide the petitioners claim for pay commission benefits expeditiously within four months thereafter It also ordered petitioners to file representation within two months
Directed respondent to decide the representation expeditiously within four months.
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. - 28
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4501 of 2008
Petitioner :- Sri Kant Dwivedi And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- N.L. Pandey,Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Nripendra Mishra,Nripendra Misra
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The petitioners are employees of the U.P. Employees Welfare Corporation. The petitioners claim the benefits of 5th Pay Commission. The claim of the petitioners is that some similar situated employees of the corporation, who are working in the area outlets of the corporation, are being extended such benefits. The petitioners are being discriminated against. The counter affidavit has not been forthcoming despite several opportunities being granted to the respondents.
In view of such facts, it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage by directing the authorities to take a decision in the matter.
The petitioners are directed to file a representation detailing their claims to the respondent No.2 within a period of two months. A mandamus is issued to the respondent No.2 commanding it to decide the representation of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the representation. The representation shall be decided by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the veracity of the assertions made in the writ petition or the validity of the claims of the petitioners. It is for the respondent No.2 to decide the same after independent application of mind in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.8.2018 Ashish Tripathi
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the authorities should be directed to decide the petitioners' claim for pay commission benefits by issuing a reasoned order.
Kant Dwivedi and Others
State Of U.P. and Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
