Disposed

Arvind Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Devp. Lko. andORS.

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2024WRIA/24842/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, without examining merits and with party consent, directed the Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Development, U.P., to decide a petitioners review application against a termination order within six weeks. The writ petition was disposed of following this direction.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 1 to decide the pending Review Application dated 12.10.2023 within six weeks.

Arvind Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:99

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 24842 of 2021

¶4

Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Devp. Lko. Andors.

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Shukla,Anand Kumar Pandey,Birendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Shukla

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents and perused the record.

¶8

By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing of the impugned termination order dated 05/08/2021 passed by opposite party. It has further been prayed to direct the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to continue on the said post where he has discharging his duty continuously on the said post before passing of the impugned order dated 05/08/2021.

¶9

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to the extent that the review application dated 12.10.2023 moved by the petitioner against the termination order in pursuance of the Government Order dated 14.08.2023 may be directed to be decided by Respondent No.1 within the stipulated period as prescribed by this Court.

¶10

Learned Standing counsel has no objection in case any such direction to the respondents is issued to decide petitioner's review application.

¶11

In view of the above, without entering into merits of the case and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, Respondent No.1 (Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Development, Civil Secretariat, U.P. Lucknow) is directed to consider and decide the Review Application dated 12.10.2023 pending against him in accordance with law expeditiously, say

¶12

within a period of six weeks from the date certified copy of this order is placed before him.

¶13

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 2.1.2024

¶15

S. Kumar

¶16

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

Arvind Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Devp. Lko. andORS.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Devp. Lko. andORS.

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

Similar cases

Mr. Rajagopalan Chakravarthi Madhvan and Another vs Special Court , P.C. Court No. 1 Lucknow and Another

Hanuman Prasad Singh Vs State of U.P. through Secy. Gram Vikas Lko. and Ors.

Indra Raj Sharma and 5 Ors. Vs Union of Inida through Secy. Ministry of Medical and Health Ne

Mohd.Khizir Khan Vs State of U.P.Thru Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Home Lko and Ors.

Ramesh Chandra Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Kapil Muni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Ors.