Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 May 2023WRIA/6813/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WRIT - A No. 6813 of 2023, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, decided 18.5.2023 by Ashutosh Srivastava, J. Petitioner sought mandamus for payment of his father's gratuity with 18% interest; representation dated 30.06.2022 pending before District Basic Education Officer, Jalaun. Petition disposed of with direction to decide the representation within two months; no opinion on merits; no quantum awarded; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, District-Jalaun, to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dated 30.06.2022, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within two months from the date of service of a certified copy of the order. ¶¶11

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:108881

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6813 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satish Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Kumar Chand

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Satish Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1, 2 & 5 and Shri Krishna Kumar Chand, learned counsel representing the respondent nos. 3 & 4.

¶7

By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has prayed to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to compute and release the amount of gratuity of father of the petitioner and make payment thereof with interest @ 18% per annum, within the period fixed by this Court.

¶8

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect thereof petitioner has already preferred a representation dated 30.06.2022 before the respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, District-Jalaun, and the same is still pending consideration.

¶9

He further submits that purpose of filing this writ petition would be served if directions are issued to the respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, District-Jalaun, to pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the petitioner.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that they have no objection to the aforesaid proposition.

¶11

Considering the submissions advanced, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the same is accordingly, disposed of requiring the respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, District-Jalaun, seized with the representation of the petitioner dated 30.06.2022, to pass appropriate orders thereon, after considering all aspects of the matter, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of two months from the date of service of a certified copy of the order of this Court.

¶12

Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and it shall be open for the respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, District-Jalaun, to pass appropriate orders.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.5.2023 Deepak/

¶14

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

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saiyyada Bibi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nishi Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Namita Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vinod Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Meena Kumari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Kumar Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others