Disposed

Jagdish Prasad v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Its Managing Dir. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2024WRIA/12172/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought direction to coordinate E.P.F. Account updates and transfer of dues. Upon consent of counsel, the court permitted the petitioner to file a representation. Petitioner to file within two weeks; respondent to decide by reasoned order within eight weeks. Court did not go into merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit representation within two weeks; Respondent No.3 to decide by reasoned order within eight weeks.

Jagdish Prasad Vs U.P. State Road… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:84291

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12172 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Jagdish Prasad Respondent :- U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Its Managing Dir. Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Gupta,Jaideep Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Ravindra Pratap Singh,Akhilesh Pratap Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶7

1 . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2 and Shri Akhilesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.3 & 4.

¶8

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

¶9

3 . Instant writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents No.3 & 4 to coordinate between the officers and update petitioner's E.P.F. Account and for transfer of a particular amount from Bareilly with interest.

¶10

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation before the respondent no.3 which may be directed to be decided within a fixed time frame to which learned counsels for the respondents have no objection.

¶11

5 . In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before the respondent no.3 then the respondent no.3 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation.

¶12

6 . With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 17.12.2024

¶15

prateek

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jagdish Prasad v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Its Managing Dir. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Prasad v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Its Managing Dir. Lko. and 3 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

Ram Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Secy., Education Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Kamta Prasad Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Minostry Commi. New Delhi and 2 Others

Girjesh Kumari Verma Vs State of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Secondary and Ors.

Smt. Meena Srivastava vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication Govt. New Delhi and 2 Others

Jagdish Prasad vs U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Its Managing Dir. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Ayyub Khan vs U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Thru. Managing Director Lko and 2 Others