Disposed

Shivanand Rai v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 May 2023WRIA/6868/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotion while his representation was pending. The court disposed of the writ by directing the Nagar Palika Parishad to decide his claim within two months via a reasoned order without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent No. 3 to consider the pending representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within two months.

Shivanand Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101654

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6868 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Shivanand Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ayub Khan,Mohd Azim Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Syed Nadeem Ahmad

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Shri Ayub Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Syed Nadeem Ahmad, learned counsel for respondent No. 3.

¶7

The case of the petitioner is that he is working as a Peon ( Chaprasi ) with the Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur. There exist vacancies on the post of Clerk, which vacancies are to be filled up 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by way of promotion.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already preferred a representation dated 1.4.2023 before the respondent No. 3-Adjishashi Adhikari, Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur 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 to pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the petitioner within the time fixed by this Court.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 submit that they have no objection to the aforesaid proposition.

¶11

This Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the issue as regards the claim for promotion of the petitioner to the existing vacancies in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur can be considered by the respondent No. 3-Adjishashi Adhikari, Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur effectively at the first instance.

¶12

Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of by requiring the respondent No. 3-Adjishashi Adhikari, Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur , seized with the representation of

¶13

the petitioner dated 1.4.2023 , to pass appropriate orders by reasoned and speaking order, after considering all aspects of the matter, expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of service of a certified copy of the order of this Court.

¶14

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-Adjishashi Adhikari, Nagar Palika Parishad, Muhammadabad, Ghazipur to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.5.2023 Ravi Prakash

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivanand Rai v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivanand Rai 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

Hari Nandan Gautam Vs Central Bank of India and 3 Others

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

Bhagirathi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Alka Sahu and 27 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Km Nishtha Pal (Minor) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Neeraj Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others