Disposed

Ramesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2022WRIA/1280/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge High Court order set aside an order annulling the petitioner's regularisation due to violation of natural justice. The court used the impugned order as a show-cause notice for the retired petitioner to file a reply within two weeks before a further reasoned order is passed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside and treated as show cause notice; petitioner directed to file reply within two weeks; respondent to pass reasoned order after hearing.

Ramesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1280 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.P. Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

Challenge has been raised to the order dated 19.11.2020 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby the earlier regularisation granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.7.2020 has been annulled.

¶7

Short ground pressed in the petition is, before passing that order, no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner and no show cause notice was issued to him. Specific pleadings in that regard are contained in paragraph-20 and 21 of the writ petition.

¶8

Perusal of the impugned order also does not indicate any date fixed in the proceedings or any notice issued to the petitioner by the Regional Selection Committee before the impugned order came to be passed.

¶9

In view of the above, besides fact conclusion drawn in the impugned order, it cannot be denied that the same appears to have been passed wholly in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶10

In face of the earlier order of regularisation passed in favour of the petitioner, valuable civil rights had been vested in him. Those could not be disturbed except in accordance with law after affording minimal opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶11

In view of the above, no useful purpose may be served in keeping the petition pending or waiting for the counter affidavit to arise.

¶12

Petitioner has already retired from service.

¶13

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 19.11.2020 is set aside. Writ petition is disposed of with a further direction, petitioner may treat the impugned order to be a show cause notice issued to him. He may accordingly file his reply thereto within a period of two weeks before the respondent No.2 supported by his personal affidavit and annexing such documents which the petitioner may seek to rely. Subject to such compliance made by the petitioner, the said respondent shall proceed to verify the correct facts and pass appropriate reasoned order after obtaining necessary reports from the DIOS as also the Committee of Management after affording a brief opportunity of hearing to the concerned. That exercise may be completed within a period of two months from the date of first compliance made by the petitioner. Any amount found due and payable may be paid out to the petitioner within a further period of two months therefrom, failing which same shall attract interest @ 8% from the date of amount becoming due till the date of its actual payment.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.11.2022 Faraz

¶15

Digitally signed by FARAZ AHMAD Date: 2022.11.18 10:33:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Smt. Prieeti Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Shashi Singh Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Dr. Pallavi Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Priti Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Shraddha Nene Vs the Registrar, Banaras Hindu University and 3 Others

Gulista Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others