Allowed

Jai Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2020WRIA/3911/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging an order rejecting a claim for counting previous temporary services. Relying on a prior judgment, the court quashed the rejection order and remanded the matter to the authority for a fresh decision within three months, mandating verification of the order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 26.10.2019 is quashed and the matter is remanded to the second respondent to decide afresh within three months.

Jai Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 83 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3911 of 2020 Petitioner :- Jai Chandra Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Hare Ram,Harish Kumar Tripathi,Sucheta Pathak

¶2

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Hare Ram Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondent.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 26.10.2019, whereby claim of petitioner has been rejected by respondent no. 2 for counting his previous services rendered by him in temporary capacity.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in Mahendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others (Writ-A No. 8535 of 2014, dt. 10.2.2020) and as such it is sought to be contended that the present matter is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment and the similar treatment may also be extended to the petitioner.

¶7

The above said argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is not being disputed by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

¶8

The writ petition is accordingly allowed in terms of Mahendra Singh(supra) . The order impugned dated 26.10.2019 is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to second respondent to decide it afresh within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order.

¶9

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶10

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶11

Order Date :- 9.7.2020 A.K.Srivastava

Jai Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

km. Mahima Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr. Supriya Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Adarsh Janta Junior High School and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Karunendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another