Disposed

Net Ram v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC10 May 2018WRIA/48790/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning the petitioner's entitlement to promotional pay, the court noted the petitioner's death during pendency. Ruling that the cause of action survives for the benefit of successors, the court remade the matter to the third respondent for reasoned adjudication within three months.

What did the court decide?

The matter remapped to the 3rd respondent to decide by a reasoned order within three months.

Net Ram Vs State of U.P. and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 48790 of 2006

¶3

Petitioner :- Net Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anupam Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

(Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 88240 of 2015)

¶6

Cause shown for delay in filing the substitution application is sufficient.

¶7

Delay condoned.

¶8

Application is allowed.

¶9

Order Date :- 10.5.2018 IrfanUddin

¶10

Court No. - 13

¶11

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 48790 of 2006

¶12

Petitioner :- Net Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anupam Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶13

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶14

(Civil Misc. Substitution Application No. 88243 of 2015)

¶15

Application is allowed.

¶16

Office is directed to substitute necessary substitution during the course of day.

¶17

Order Date :- 10.5.2018 IrfanUddin

¶18

Court No. - 13

¶19

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 48790 of 2006

¶20

Petitioner :- Net Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anupam Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶21

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is entitled for the promotional pay scale having completed 14 years of service and his entitlement became due since January 1996. He has placed reliance on Government Order dated 02.12.2000. However, the petitioner died in Harness during the pendency of writ petition.

¶23

The contention is that if the claim of the deceased petitioner is allowed by the respondents, the same shall have bearing upon various dues of the deceased employee which will be paid to the successors of the petitioner, inasmuch as, the arrears for unpaid amount shall also be paid.

¶24

In view of the above, I am of the view that cause of action since survives in the matter, the same is required to be examined in the first instance by the 3rd respondent. The petitioners are directed to produce certified copy of this order along with memo of petition with all annexures appended therewith to the 3rd respondent within a period of six weeks, who on receipt of such representation shall decide the matter by reasoned and speaking order within a further period of three months.

¶25

With the aforesaid directions the writ petition is disposed of .

¶26

Order Date :- 10.5.2018 IrfanUddin

Net Ram v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Net Ram v. State of U.P. and 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

Rajendra Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and Others

Khalik and Anr. Vs State of U.P.

Anwar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mahesh Chandra Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru Principle Secretary Power and Others

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Kaushlesh Prasad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Others