Dismissed

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2019WRIA/18454/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotion from Assistant Teacher to Lecturer. Court noted delay in forwarding promotion papers by respondent authority. Without deciding merits, court directed District Inspector to take action against the concerned authority if documents were not forwarded and complete the exercise within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directing the District Inspector of Schools to take appropriate action within one month if promotion papers were not forwarded.

Om Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18454 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Om Prakash Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishnu Shanker Gupta,Ramesh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

It is argued by Sri Vishnu Shanker Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner that the papers for promotion of the petitioner from the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade to the post of lecturer in Civics is still pending consideration before the respondents. In this regard the Joint Director of Education (Secondary) Varanasi Region, Varanasi on the basis of the letter written by the petitioner dated 17.10.2017 also written a letter to the District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur/respondent no. 4 dated 06.11.2017 to consider the claim of the petitioner, in respect of the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in Civics. Counsel for the petitioner also relied upon a letter dated 17.09.2019 written by the respondent no. 4 to the respondent no. 5 (Annexure-16 to the writ petition). It is argued that inspite of the lapse of considerable time papers and documents were not forwarded by the respondent no. 5.

¶6

On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the petitioner is not entitled for the promotion on the post of lecturer in Civics due to the reason that the petitioner has not completed five years of his services.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶8

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is being disposed of at the final stage itself.

¶9

In view of above, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent no. 4/District Inspector of School, Jaunpur to take appropriate action against the respondent no. 5, if the papers and documents pertaining to the promotion of the petitioner were not forwarded by them pursuant to the letter dated 17.09.2019, copy of which is appended as Annexure-16 to the writ petition.

¶10

The aforesaid exercise be completed by the respondent no. 4 within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated anything on the merits of the case and it is for the Authority to take a decision in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 25.11.2019 Swati

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Sajan Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Chhote Lal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satya Narayan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Janak Dulari Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Kanika Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pawan Kumar and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others