Dismissed

Man Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2018WRIA/51618/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of orders and directives for reinstatement and salary payment. The court found the case unsustainable due to lack of appearance and interest, dismissing the writ petition and vacating any interim order.

What did the court decide?

Dismissed the writ petition and vacated any interim order. No relief granted for quashing orders or salary payment.

Man Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 51618 of 2002

¶3

Petitioner :- Man Singh & Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mansoor Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,R.K. Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.

¶5

Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel is present for respondents. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, petitioners have sought following reliefs:

¶7

"a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Government Order dated 29 June, 2002 as contained in Annexure No. 6 of the writ petition and the order dated 01.11.2002 passed by the Respondent No. 5 as contained in Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition.

¶8

b) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 5 to permit the petitioners No. 1 and 2 to work as Assistant Coordinator on their respective post at BRC, Dhata, Fatehpur and the Respondent No. 3 as Coordinator at BRC, Thariyaon, Fatehpur.

¶9

c) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 5 to pay to the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 the difference of the arrears of salary as a Assistant Coordinator from the date of their appointments and also pay to the Petitioner No. 3 the difference of the arrears of salary as a Coordinator from the date of her appointment.

¶10

d) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 5 to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioners with effect from the month of June, 2002 till date and may further direct to pay their respective salary regularly."

¶11

I myself have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioners are not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.

¶12

Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the

¶13

petitioners have lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioners is absent.

¶14

Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶15

Order Date :- 7.12.2018 Siddhant Sahu

Man Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Man Singh and Others 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

Smt. Manorma Agarwal Vs Ram Pyari Arya Kanya Inter College and Others

Smt. Mukhtiari and Others Vs Ram Chandra and Others

Shyam Bihari and Others Vs Buneli and Others

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mansoor Ahmad and Others

U.I.I. Co. Vs J.P. Singh

U.P.S.R.T.C. Vs Hafiz Jamil Ahmad