Disposed

Vikesh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023WRIA/2160/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge heard arguments on the petitioner's representation and crafts a period for consideration by the statutory authority. Grants leave to implead the Gram Sabha and directs a reasoned order within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Left to implead the Gram Sabha as a party and directed the respondent to decide the pending representation within 8 weeks via a speaking order.

Vikesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2160 of 2023 Petitioner :- Vikesh Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C

¶2

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Prem Bahadur Singh holding brief of Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, the learned respondent no. 4.

¶4

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has served a copy of the petition to Sri Sri R.P. Shukla, learned counsel who usually appears on behalf of the Gram Sabha, Balia, however, inadvertently, he could not implead him as a party and seeks the leave of the Court to implead the said Gram Sabha as a party.

¶5

He is permitted to implead the Gram Sabha as a party during the course of the day.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his arguments that a representation dated 16.01.2023 is pending before the respondent no. 2, a copy of which is on record as Annexure No. 7and as such he submits that in case if the representation is decided within such time to be fixed by this Court, ends of justice can be met.

¶7

Considering the statement so made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to call for the counter affidavit or to seek instructions from the State rather is of the opinion that ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner by a speaking and reasoned order and intimating the same to the petitioner preferrably within a period of eight weeks from the date, a certified copy of this order is placed before the Authority concerned.

¶8

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of the petitioner on merits and the Authority concerned shall decide the same strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and law.

¶9

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Asheesh

¶11

Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikesh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikesh Kumar Sharma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vimla Devi Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Krishan Murari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Yashpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others