Disposed

Prakash Chand Tyagi v. D.I.O.S. and Others

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2020WRIA/25924/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought quashing of an order terminating his service due to pending pension. The bench disposed of the writ, directing the Deputy Director of Education to decide the pending representation within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Deputy Director of Education to consider the pending representation dated 12.11.2020 and decide it in accordance with law within two months.

Prakash Chand Tyagi Vs D.I.O.S. and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 75 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25924 of 1998 Petitioner :- Prakash Chand Tyagi Respondent :- D.I.O.S. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K.P. Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶3

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to impleade Deputy Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut as respondent no.3 in the array of the respondents during the course of the day.

¶4

Heard Sri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State the perused the material available on record.

¶5

By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 20.06.1998 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut so far it relates to the termination of service of the petitioner as Assistant Clerk in Adarsh Nagrik Inter College, Khazuri, District Meerut.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been retired from service on 30.09.2014 and retiral benefits have been given to the petitioner but the petitioner has not been paid pension so far. In this regards, petitioner has submitted a representation before the Deputy Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut on 12.11.2020, which is pending consideration. He has further submitted that the representation of the petitioner may be directed to decide expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid contention and states that in case the said representation is still pending, the same shall be considered and disposed off in accordance with law.

¶8

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, but without prejudice to the merits of the case, the writ petition is finally disposed off with direction to the Deputy Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut-respondent no.3 to consider and decide the representation dated 12.11.2020 pending before it, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶9

Order Date :- 16.12.2020/Ajeet

Prakash Chand Tyagi v. D.I.O.S. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Chand Tyagi v. D.I.O.S. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Siddique and Another Vs Shri Sultan Ahmad and Others

Jang Bahadur Singh Vs Addl. Commissionerjudicial Jhansi Division Jhansi andOTHERS

Fatema Parveen Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Mithilesh Prasad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vikash Singh and Another Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Dinesh Chandra Dixit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others