Disposed

Rajendra Ram v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2023WRIA/18256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the failure to accord promotion to the petitioner despite the setting aside of his adverse entry by the State Services Tribunal. The High Court directed the respondent authorities to process his claim for promotion as Sub Inspector within 30 days and restore his seniority within a further 30 days. The petition was disposed of with these directions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to pass appropriate orders for the petitioner's promotion as Sub Inspector within 30 days and restore seniority within another 30 days.

Rajendra Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:207460

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18256 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Rajendra Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Ojha,Sumit Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Petitioner, who has been working on the post of Head Constable, claims promotion against the post of Sub Inspector which has been accorded to various persons of his seniority under the order issued by the Police Headquarter on 06.10.2023.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in the year 2013 while he was working as Constable, he was awarded adverse entry against which he preferred a departmental appeal which came to be dismissed on 04.02.2015. Consequently, he challenged both the orders before the U.P. State Services Tribunal, Lucknow vide Claim Petition No. 1018 of 2015. The said claim petition came to be allowed by the order dated 01.11.2017 setting aside the order of adverse entry and also of the appellate authority and directing for all consequently benefits as well to the petitioner. The operative portion of the order is reproduced hereunder:

¶9

आददेश

¶10

" ययाचचिकया स्ववीकयार ककी जयातवी हहै। चवपकवी ससंख्यया -4 दयारया पयाररत दण्डयाददेश चदनयासंक 15-6-2013 (ससंल्ሿक ससंख्यया-5) जजसकदे दयारया ययाचिवी कको वरर 2012 कदे जलए पररचनसंदया ्ቚचवचቖኌ कया दण्ड पयाररत चकयया गयया हहै एवसं अपवीलवीय आददेश चदनयासंक 04-02-2015 (ससंल्ሿक ससंख्यया-7) चनरस्त चकयदे जयातदे हहै। इस दण्ड कदे आधयार पर रकोकदे गयदे सदेवया सम्बन्धवी सभवी लयाग ययाचिवी चनयमयाननुसयार पयानदे कया अजधकयारवी हहै। चवपकवीगण इस चनणरय एवसं आददेश कया अननुपयालन इस चनणरय ककी्ቚ

¶11

मयाचणत ्ቚचत ्ቚया्቎ हकोनदे ककी चतजथि सदे तवीन मयाह कदे अन्दर करनया सनुचनशशचित कररगदे।

¶12

उभयपक वयाद व्यय वहन कररगदे।"

¶13

It transpires that as a consequence to the same, an order came to be passed by Superintendent of Police, Deoria on 03.12.2018 noticing the judgment of the Tribunal dated 01.11.2017 and the request made by the petitioner for restoration of all service benefits directed that the petitioner be given all such benefits that had been withheld on account of punishment in the nature of adverse entry provisionally being awarded to him. Relevant part of the order dated 03.12.2018 passed by Superintendent of Police Deoria is reproduced hereunder:

¶14

" कयान्स० 892470165 नया०पनु० रयाजदेन ् रयाम दयारया मयाननवीय न्ययाययालय कदे चनमरय चदनयासंक 01.11.2017 ससंल्ሿकर यह अननुरकोध चकयया हहै चक मयाननवीय न्ययाययालय कदे चनणरय कया समयादर करतदे हहयदे उसककी चिरर्ቔ पसंजजकया मर असंचकत उ्ሹ दण्डयाददेश, अपवील चनरस्तवीकरण आददेश कको चवलकोचपत चकयदे जयानदे तथिया उ्ሹ दण्डयाददेश कदे कयारण जजन -जजन लयाभको सदे उसदे वसंचचित चकयया गयया हहै , समस्त पयाररणयाचमक लयाभको कको ्ቚदयान चकयदे जयानदे ससंबसंधवी न्ययायकोचचित आददेश पयाररत करनदे ककी ककपया करदे।

¶15

अततः कयान्स० 892470165 नया०पनु० रयाजदेन ् रयाम दयारया चदयदे गयदे आव द ेन प्ቔ चदनयासंचकत 23.11.2017 पर सहयाननुभभूचत पभूवरक चवचियार करतदे हहयदे मयाननवीय न्ययाययालय कदे आददेश चदनयासंक 01.11.2017 कदे अननुपयालन मर आददेश ससंख्यया पवी - 37/2013 चदनयासंक 15.05.2013 एवसं पनुजलस उपमहयाचनरवीकक गकोरखपनुर पररकदे्ቔ गकोरखपनुर कदे आददेश ससंख्यया-सवीओजवी-सवीए-नन-अपवील-(73)/2013/2031 चदनयासंक 04.02.2015 कको चनरस्त चकयदे जयानदे कया आददेश पयाररत चकयया जयातया हहै तथिया उ्ሹ दण्डयाददेश कदे कयारण ययाचिवी कदे रकोकदे गयदे सदेवया ससंबसंधवी सभवी लयाभ कको चदयदे जयानदे कया आददेश पयाररत चकयया जयातया हहै। यह आददेश मयाननवीय न्ययाययालय कदे आददेश चदनयासंक 01.11.2017 कदे अधवीन रहदेगया।

¶16

ससंख्यया-य-386/2015

¶17

चदनयासंक 3.12.2018"

¶18

Petitioner, however, came to be promoted only routinely in the year 2021 and resultantly he could not be placed in the list of promotion of Sub Inspectors by way of seniority. The promotion list published by the Headquarter on 06.10.2023, copy whereof has been ground on record as Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition. Petitioner represented the matter and the Superintendent of Police, Azamgarh this time requested the Superintendent of Police (Establishment), Police Headquarter, U.P., Lucknow that the petitioner's claim for being accorded promotion as Head Constable since the year 2015 as his batch came to be promoted as such on account of adverse entry being set aside by the Tribunal.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date no decision has been taken despite letter written by the Superintendent of Police, Azamgarh on 04.11.2022. The operative portion of the request letter dated 04.11.2022 of Superintendent of Police, Azamgarh is reproduced hereunder:

¶20

" अततः अननुरकोध हहै चक मनुख्य आरकवी नया०पनु० 892470165 रयाजदेन ् ्ቚसयाद दयारया्ቚ स्तनुत ्ቚत्ययाव द ेन चदनयासंक 27-02-2022 कदे आलकोक मदे वरर 2015 कदे ररच्ሹयय कदे सयापदेक मनुख्य आरकवी पद पर पदको्ቐचत ्ቚदयान चकयदे जयानदे कदे सम्बन्ध मर चनणरय लदेनदे ककी ककपया करर।'

¶21

Learned Standing Counsel submits that since the matter is engaging attention of the authority, therefore, Superintendent of Police (Establishment), Police Headquarter, U.P., Lucknow may be directed to do the needful in the matter.

¶22

Accordingly, direction is issued to the respondent no. 2 to pass appropriate orders in terms of the orders passed by the Tribunal and the earlier order passed by Superintendent of Police, Deoria and request made by Superintendent of Police, Azamgarh within a period of 30 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order and if the petitioner's claim found to be genuine in view of the orders quoted herein above in this order, he shall be accorded due promotion as Sub Inspection within a further period of 30 days restoring his seniority as a result of decision taken by the Tribunal in past.

¶23

With the aforesaid observations and directions this petition stands disposed of .

¶24

Order Date :- 31.10.2023 IrfanUddin

¶25

Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajendra Ram v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Ram 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

Durgesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr. Meera Sanjay Homeopathic Medical Officer Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shailesh Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Inayatulla Khan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Prem Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Pyre Singh Vs State of U P and 2 Others