The High Court allowed a fresh representation by an employee claiming delay in Department of Instruction approval for appointment. The respondent is directed to decide within two months, though this order was explicitly not on merits.
Fresh detailed representation permitted; all-grievance decision within two months by respondent no. 3.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5084 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sarvashakti Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Ji Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Order on Order Sheet.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue involved in the present writ petition is not similar to the issue involved in Writ-A No.5032 of 2021.
In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is taken up for admission.
Order on Writ Petition.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State.
Present writ petition is filed by the petitioner claiming that he has been appointed as Class-IV employee in Sampurnanand Inter College, Ratsar Ballia and his documents are duly forwarded by the committee of management to the D.I.O.S. Ballia for approval, however no decision is taken in the matter till date.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of petitioner would be sufficiently met in case representation of petitioner for the said purposes is considered and decided in a time bound manner.
Learned standing counsel has no objection to the same.
In view thereof, petitioner is permitted to make a fresh detailed representation to respondent no.3-District Inspector of Schools, Ballia raising all his grievance, annexing therewith a copy of this writ petition along with annexures and all the documents in support of his claim within a period of two weeks from today along with a computer generated/certified copy of this order.
In case such a representation is moved by petitioner, respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months
from the date a computer generated/certified copy of this order along with representation is placed before him.
It is made clear that this court has not applied itself on the merits of the case and all questions are left open to be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2021 Sattyarth
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can be permitted to file a fresh detailed representation regarding delay in approval of appointment.
Sarvashakti Singh
State Of U.P.
Saral Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
