Disposed

Jeet Lal v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2023WRIA/21205/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to examine the claim for suspension salary on merits. It directed the authority to decide the pending representation within six weeks and, if no legal impediment exists, to pay salary promptly. The court reserved the merits for the authority.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to decide pending representation within six weeks and pay suspension salary if no legal impediment exists.

Jeet Lal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21205 of 2022

¶2

Petitioner :- Jeet Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishnu Shankar Choubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh

¶3

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anakshi Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶5

The issue in question, which is trivial one, is that the petitioner is claiming the payment of salary for the period he remained under suspension along with interest.

¶6

It is urged that the petitioner has already escalated the matter before the authority concerned by moving representation dated 15.2.2018, copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure-13 to the writ petition, however the same has not yet been decided.

¶7

Considering the aforesaid circumstances as well as the relief as prayed, this Court is of the opinion that the issue whether the petitioner is entitled to salary for the period he remained under suspension, is to be decided by the authority concerned. Accordingly, at this stage this Court does not deem it appropriate to keep the petition pending rather is of the opinion that ends of justice can be met by directing the respondent no.4 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner in accordance with applicable Rules and law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date an authenticated copy of this order is placed before the authority concerned. It is also provided that in case if there is no legal impediment, the payment of salary of the petitioner during suspension period shall be paid within the aforesaid period and in case if there is any legal impediment for the reasons to be recorded, the representation of the petitioner may be decided within the aforesaid period.

¶8

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the claim of the petitioner on merits, which shall be considered and decided by the authority concerned in accordance with law.

¶9

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 2.2.2023 SP

¶11

Digitally signed by :- SALIM PRAVEJ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jeet Lal v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeet Lal v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Shivakant Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr. Swati Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr. Rakesh Kumar Lal Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Shashi Kant Singh Yadav Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shama Faseeh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others