Disposed

Munni Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC13 May 2024/2343/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227 seeking expeditious disposal of a pending claim petition before the State Public Service Tribunal, the Court rejected the prayer due to lack of extraordinary circumstances. However, it granted liberty to the petitioner to move an application detailing urgency within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for expeditious disposal rejected with liberty to move an urgency application before the Tribunal within two weeks.

Munni Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36403

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2343 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Munni Lal

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Govt. Lko. And 5 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mrs. Rubina Zafar,Devendra Kumar Singh,Suresh Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Suresh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶9

In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶10

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of Claim Petition No. 943 of 2022 (Munni Lal Vs. State of U.P. & others) pending before State Public Service Tribunal, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petition would be sufficiently met in case State Public Service Tribunal, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.

¶12

Considering the fact that the claim petition was filed in 2022 of which proceedings are underway and from the perusal of the writ petition, there is no disclosure of any extra ordinary circumstance as to why this Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the trial court to decide the same expeditiously.

¶13

This Court is conscious of the fact that the tribunals are burdened to heavy dockets and in a routine manner directions cannot be passed to the trial court to decide any particular case out of turn expeditiously. It is when some extra ordinary circumstance is made out only then it would be appropriate for this Court to exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There also liberty should be given to the petitioner to place his grievances before the Tribunal who after looking into the urgency as well as dockets situation and pass appropriate orders to expedite the suit proceedings. In the present case no such circumstances has

¶14

been mentioned or made out requiring interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the prayer as sought by petitioner is rejected.

¶15

However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditiously disposal of the claim petition before the Tribunal. In case, such application is moved within two weeks from today the Tribunal shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, say, within three weeks thereafter. In case, the Tribunal is prima facie satisfied that a case for urgency is made out it shall pass suitable order thereon.

¶16

With aforesaid observation and direction the petition stands disposed of.

¶17

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 13.5.2024 Ravi/

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Munni Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munni Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and 5 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aakriti Makheja Vs U.P. Tourism Department Thru. Director General, Paryatan Bhawan,Lko. and 4 Others

Rajpati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Sabiha Begam Vs District Judge, Bahraich and Others

Khursheed Ahmad vs Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court Room No. 15 Sultanpur and 4 Others

Kaushal Kishor Das Alias Kaushal Kishor Pandey and 2 Others Vs Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sadar Faizabad and 3 Others

Munni Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and 5 Others