Disposed

Shesh Narayan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Finance Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2024/2875/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking duty and honorarium on the Prantiya Rakshak Dal post. Counsel sought liberty to file a fresh representation before respondent no.2, which the court permitted, directing a reasoned decision within six weeks, without entering the merits, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file fresh representation; respondent no.2 directed to decide it by reasoned order within six weeks.

Shesh Narayan Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. the… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29161

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2875 of 2024 Petitioner :- Shesh Narayan Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Finance Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 5.

¶6

With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.

¶7

The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to provide the duty to the petitioner on the post of Prantiya Rakshak Dal and pay honorarium as is being paid to the other members of the Prantiya Rakshak Dal.

¶8

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to the reliefs sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the respondent no.2 i.e. Director General Provincial Guard Team / Development Team and Youth Welfare, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow which may be directed to be decided within a time frame fixed by this Court to which learned Counsel for the respondents has no objection.

¶9

In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before respondent no.2 then respondent no.2 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and the relevant rules within a further period of six weeks from the date of submission of the representation along with certified copy of this order.

¶10

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of .

¶11

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim set forth by the petitioner.

¶12

Order Date :- 10.4.2024 J. K. Dinkar

¶13

Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shesh Narayan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Finance Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shesh Narayan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Finance Lko. and 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

Ayush Dwivedi Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Defense Govt.of India New Delhi and Others

Virendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Kamlesh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Kiran Srivastava Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.to Govt.Irrigation Deptt and Ors.

Ram Kumar Vs Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.P. Lucknow and 2 Others

Sanjeev Kumar Pal Pno NO.122560026 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Others