Writ petition seeking direction to treat Ad-hoc service as qualifying for pension benefits was non-meritorious; time granted for Counter Affidavit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2378 of 2024
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Ayush Lko. U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra Verma,Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
The present writ petition has been preferred for issuing direction to the respondents to consider the Ad-hoc service rendered by the petitioner as qualifying service for the purposes of payment of post retiral as well as pensionery benefits in accordance with the direction given by this Court in Writ A No. 9030 of 2021 (Avadhesh Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P. and 5 Ors.)
Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received has submitted that the initial appointment of the petitioner was de hors the service Rules, hence his case is not covered under Section 2 of the Act, 2021 and prays for some time for filing counter affidavit.
As prayed, three weeks' time is granted to the learned Standing Counsel for filing counter affidavit.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a further period of two weeks.
List thereafter.
Order Date :- 28.3.2024 Nitesh
Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Rajesh Kumar Shukla
State Of U.P.
Manish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
