Dismissed

Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2022WRIA/20043/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging an order directing vacancy submission for Assistant Clerk posts, the High Court held that the authority cannot act on such details while a prior pending claim by the petitioner remains undecided under a previous judgment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner served direction that respondents shall not act on vacancy details until petitioner's claim is dealt with in compliance with the order in Writ A No. 24688 of 2018.

Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20043 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajnish Kumar Srivastava,Siddharth Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it transpires, the order dated 08.09.2022 has been passed by the DIOS, Jaunpur, directing the Manager/Principal of all institutions at Jaunpur to submit details of vacancy on the post of Assistant Clerk.

¶6

In view of the instructions received by learned Standing Counsel, it further transpires, communication had been issued without first considering the petitioner's claim in accordance with the direction issued by the writ Court dated 26.11.2018 in Writ - A No. 24688 of 2018 (Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & 2 Ors.). That writ petition was disposed of with the following direction:

¶7

"In the facts and circumstances, noticed above, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no.2 to accord consideration to petitioner's claim for appointment, keeping in view the observations made by this Court in Abhishek Tripathi (supra), after affording opportunity of hearing to the respondent no.3, by way of a reasoned order, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order."

¶8

Since the claim of the petitioner appears to be still pending, direction contained in the impugned order with respect to the post of Assistant Clerk, issued by the DIOS, Jaunpur, cannot be given effect to with respect to one post of Assistant Clerk at Samajwadi Inter College, Gabhiran, Jaunpur, during pendency of the petitioner's claim.

¶9

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction, though respondent no.3 may have communicated the position of vacancy on the post of Assistant Clerk to the DIOS, Jaunpur, the said authority/respondent no.2 shall not act on the same except after dealing with the petitioner's claim in compliance of the direction dated26.11.2018 in Writ - A No. 24688 of 2018. That compliance may be made within a period of one month from today, in accordance with law.

¶10

Order Date :- 3.12.2022 Abhilash

¶11

Digitally signed by ABHILASH SINGH Date: 2022.12.05 11:38:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Rajendra Singh Verma Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rajendra Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Committee of Management, Chacha Nehru Smarak Inter College, Kanpur Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Roomi Bano Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chasmuddin Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Narendra Kumar Vs Union of India and 3 Others