Disposed

Iqbal Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Deptt. Social Welfare Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2024/3599/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking approval and disbursement of scholarship. Court did not examine merits but granted liberty to file fresh representation. Authority directed to decide within six weeks of such filing.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to move fresh representation; authority directed to decide within six weeks of such filing within 15 days.

Iqbal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31123

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3599 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Iqbal Ahmad

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy., Deptt. Social Welfare Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard Iqbal Ahmad in person and Sri Uday Veer Singh, additional chief standing counsel for the State.

¶8

Instant petition has been filed with the prayer that a Writ in the nature of Mandamus may be issued directing the authorities to approve applications preferred by the petitioner for his scholarship and disbursed the scholarship amount at the earliest in order to enable the petitioner to pursue the said course without any hardship and further to provide all benefits as prescribed in the Uttar Pradesh Post Matric Scholarship other than Inter, along with the other prayers.

¶9

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that even after several letters and reminders no decision has been taken yet.

¶10

Adding his argument, he submits that the district level committee has already recommended with respect to the abovesaid scholarship vide its decision dated 07.03.2024 and the petitioner has been thrown to suffer as no decision is taken yet.

¶11

After the aforesaid, he submits that the petitioner may be given liberty to move representation before opposite party no. 1 with request to authorities to take decision in consonance with the recommendation of the District Level Committee dated

¶12

07.03.2024 and the State may be directed to decide the same within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has no objection to the contention aforesaid.

¶14

In view of the above and without entering into merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to move a fresh representation before the State, within period of 15 days, and once the same is preferred, the competent authority is directed to take decision within further period of six weeks.

¶15

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.4.2024 Mayank

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Iqbal Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Deptt. Social Welfare Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iqbal Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Deptt. Social Welfare Lko. and 4 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

Shanti Devi Jain Degree College, Muzaffarnagar Thru. Manager Subhash Jain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education, Lucknow and Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs Managing Director U.P. Jal Nigam (Nagriya) Lko. and 3 Others

Dr. Avinash Kumar Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Medical Education and Training, Lucknow and Others

Ram Kali Kanya Vidyalaya Samiti Sultanpur Thru. Manager and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Institutinal Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Meenu Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education and 3 Others

Pratima Bharti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Basic Education Govt. Lko. and 4 Others