Disposed

Raj Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India and 4 Others

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2019WRIA/19899/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition seeking regularization of service for a daily-wager college employee. The petitioners witnessed junior staff regularization, prompting the grievance. The court directed the petitioner to submit grievances to the Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University, for a reasoned decision.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to file grievances before the Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University; University to decide via reasoned order within two months.

Raj Kumar Srivastava Vs Union of India and 4 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19899 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Srivastava Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Prabhat Tripathi,Vinod Kumar Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V.K. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Sri Chandan Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.

¶6

The petitioner claims to have been working as daily-wager (Class III employee) in the college of respondent no.4 since 28.04.1999. It is stated that since the date of appointment, the petitioner is continuously working as daily-wager (Class III employee).

¶7

The Principal of the college on 07.01.2018 sent a letter to the Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University, Allahabad for seeking approval for absorption of the petitioner as permanent employee on Class III post. Copy of the letter dated 07.01.2018 is enclosed as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition.

¶8

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is working for the last 25 years as daily-wager and the services of juniors to the petitioner have been regularized but his services have not been regularized. The averments with regard to the regularization of juniors have been made by the petitioner in paragraph 17 of the writ petition.

¶9

Learned counsel for the University submits that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent no.3- Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University, Allahabad raising all his grievances, the respondent no.3 shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the the respondent no.3-Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University, Allahabad raising all his grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case any such representation is filed, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months thereafter after hearing all the

¶11

parties concerned.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed off.

¶13

Order Date :- 10.12.2019 S.Sharma

Raj Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India 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

Rajiv Nandan Upadhyaya Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sunil Henry Vs Union of India and Others

Laxmi Kant Tripathi Vs M.D. U.P.S.R.T.C. Lucknow and Others

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Arshad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others