Disposed

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. (Secondry Education) and 7 Others

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2024WRIA/2705/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought mandatory relief for delayed payment of salaries. Court did not decide merits; liberty granted to submit fresh representation to a respondent official with fixed timelines for decision.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to submit fresh representation to District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur, within two weeks. District Inspector directed to decide within further six weeks.

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others vs State of U.P… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:27652

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2705 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. (Secondry Education) And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Daya Shankar Tiwari,Aditya Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he does not want to press the prayer clause no. 2 of the writ petition.

¶7

Instant writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief :-

¶8

I. To issue writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing/commanding Opposite Parties to make the total payment of salary/Honorarium forthwith, due towards the petitioners who have been employed on the post of Class IV employee through Out Sourcing Agency(Opp. Party No. 8) through GeM Portal in various Non-Government Aided Secondary Schools.'

¶9

Contention of learned learned counsel for the petitioners is that even after several letters and reminders sent to the opposite parties, no decision has been taken as yet. He further submits that the petitioners have submitted a representation before the opposite parties on 22-02-2024 and the same may be directed to be decided within a stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this court.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State does not controvert the aforesaid contention.

¶11

Be that as it may without entering into the merits of the case, liberty is given to the petitioners to move a fresh representation before the opposite party no. 5 i.e. the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur, within a period of two weeks from today and if such representation is moved by the petitioners, the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur is directed to decide the same within further period of six weeks, in accordance with law.

¶12

The instant writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 4.4.2024 AKS

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. (Secondry Education) and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. (Secondry Education) and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Suman Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Shiksha Deptt. U.P. and 6 Others

Asha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Basic Education Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Ram Prasad Vs Sarju Prasad

Deepak Tandon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Personnel Lko. and 3 Others

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. (Secondry Education) and 7 Others

Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.of Culture Lko. and 4 Ors.