Allowed

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Commercial Tax Lko.and Ors.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2024WRIA/27493/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotion as Commercial Tax Officer, denied due to pendency of proceedings against regularization of subordinates. Following a higher court judgment resolving those proceedings, High Court directed respondent to consider petitioner's candidature with backdated benefits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider petitioner for promotion from date of subordinates' promotion with consequential benefits within two months.

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:22216

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 27493 of 2021

¶4

Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Commercial Tax Lko.And Ors.

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar,Sudhanshu Srivastava

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel.

¶9

The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 27.09.2021 whereby the petitioner has been denied promotion on the post of Commercial Tax Officer on the ground that certain orders of regularisation were passed in favour of some other persons which were cancelled by the State Government against which the writ petitions are pending and the matter is subjudice before the High Court therefore, the case of the petitioner could not be considered for promotion and with a further prayer to direct the respondent to grant promotion to the petitioner on the post of Commercial Tax Officer with effect from the date when his counter parts or persons junior to him have been given promotion with all consequential benefits including fixation of pay and arrears.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that writ petitions filed against the order of cancellation of regularization was decided and partly allowed by this Court by its judgment and order dated 29.03.2023 and the leading case was Writ-A No.18167 of 2019 (Smt. Vinita Negi vs. State of U.P. and others) , copy of the judgment has been enclosed as Annexure

¶11

No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on 19.04.2023.

¶12

It is further submitted that the promotion of the petitioner has been denied on the basis of the controversy involved in those writ petitions but now all those petitioners in those writ petitions, who were junior to the petitioner have been promoted on the post of Commercial Tax Officer so the respondent No.2 may be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Commercial Tax Officer from the date when his counter parts or persons junior to him have been promoted with all consequential benefits.

¶13

The learned State counsel has very fairly submitted that the judgment which has been filed as Annexure No.SA-1 is the judgment passed in the writ petitions due to which the promotion of the petitioner has been denied by the impugned order and now he has no objection if the Court issues direction to respondent No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion.

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for parties and going through the record, the position which emerges out is that the promotion of the petitioner was denied only on the ground of pendency of the writ petitions against the order of cancellation of regularization of some other persons by the State Government. After the judgment dated 29.03.2023, now no hurdle or obstruction is in existence for considering the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Commercial Tax Officer from the date the counter parts or persons junior to the petitioner has been given promotion on the post of Commercial Tax Officer.

¶15

In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made herein above, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent No.2-The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Vibhuti

¶16

Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Commercial Tax Officer from the date his counter parts or persons junior to him have been given promotion with all consequential benefits, if any, within a period of two months from the date, a certified copy of this order is served.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.3.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Commercial Tax Lko.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Commercial Tax Lko.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Kumar and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Information and Public Relat

Srikant Prasad Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and Ors.

Ranjit Singh Yadav Alias Ranjit Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Horticulture, U.P. Lucknow and 2 Others

Sanjay Srivastava Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Labour Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Prem Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Labour Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Bachcha Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and 2 Others