Disposed

Om Prakash Rai v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2021WRIA/6802/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a direction for continued service as Secretary of a bank. The Court directed the competent authority to decide the pending statutory appeal within eight weeks and granted liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court if the appeal remained undecided.

What did the court decide?

Direction to decide pending appeal within eight weeks; Liberty to approach Court if appeal undecided.

Om Prakash Rai Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6802 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Om Prakash Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Lal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents.

¶6

The present petition has been filed seeking the following relief:

¶7

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of directing respondent no. 2 and 3 to comply with the directions/circular of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies dated 20.9.2018 and ensure its compliance and ensure the continuance of petitioner as Secretary of the Bank for further period of five years as enshrined in the circular without inordinate delay so that justice be done."

¶8

During the pendency of the writ petition supplementary affidavit has been filed that despite the petitioner being eligible for continuing upto the age of 65 years in service, the petitioner was wrongly denied the benefit and an order was passed on 26.6.2021 by the Committee of Management of the bank against which the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal before the Respondent no. 3 which is not being decided. He argues that the inaction in deciding the appeal filed against the resolution dated 26.6.2001 is resulting in the denial of benefits flowing out of the earlier resolution whereby the age of retirement

¶9

was increased from 60 to 65 years.

¶10

In view of the said submissions, it is directed that the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the resolution dated 26.6.2021, and pending before the respondent no. 3 shall be decided with all expedition within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of the copy of the order before the respondent no. 3. It is further provided that after the decision of the said appeal or in the event the appeal is not decided within eight weeks, as directed above, the petitioner shall be liberty to approach this Court for the effective relief in the matter.

¶11

The writ petition is disposed off in terms of the said order.

¶12

Copy of the order downloaded from the website of Allahabad High Court shall be accepted/treated as certified copy of the order.

¶13

Order Date :- 16.7.2021

¶14

Puspendra

Om Prakash Rai v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Rai v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Bhanu Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manveer Singh and 12 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Beer Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

The Committee of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nilesh Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others