Allowed

Rishi Nath Singh v. State of U.P.through Secy.Minorites Wakfs and 2 Ors.

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2024WRIA/2757/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a writ petition seeking permanent absorption and rejection of repatriation. The Court held the petitioner's lien was broken and directed authorities to confirm his absorption in the Department of Minority Welfare.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued directing authorities to issue an order of absorption in the Department of Minority Welfare with consequential benefits.

Rishi Nath Singh Vs State of U.P.through… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2133

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2757 of 2002 Petitioner :- Rishi Nath Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Secy.Minorites Wakfs And 2 Ors.

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- U.N.Misra,Anuj Singh,Neel Kamal Mishra

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Tewari

¶6

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Upendra Nath Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Anuj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel.

¶8

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 08.05.2002 whereby the petitioner has been repatriated in the parent department, i.e. Ram Ganga Command Authority, Kanpur under Irrigation Department on the post of Clerk even after issuance of his final absorption order dated 29.07.1998 in the borrowing department i.e. the department of Directorate of Minority Welfare, State of U.P. Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by means of order dated 14.5.1996, his services were transferred in the Minority Welfare Department from parent department and since then he is working there. After final absorption of petitioner's services in the borrowing department on 29.07.1998, his lien in parent department was broken on 30.11.1998, thus, there is no post to take him back in the parent department. This Court by means of interim order dated 15.05.2002, considering the aforesaid circumstances stayed the operation of the order impugned dated 08.05.2002 and thus, the petitioner worked in the Minority Welfare Department for more than 27 years and he is presently working on the promoted post of senior clerk. Further, parent department has finally confirmed vide order dated 18.06.2008 that petitioner's lien from parent department has already been cancelled, so there is no place for him to go, after 27 years of service in Directorate of Minority Welfare.

¶10

Therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid facts, I am of the view that the petitioner is bound to be treated as permanent employee and be absorbed in the Department of Minority Welfare, State of U.P. only and a writ of mandamus is issued therefore with the directions to the authority concerned to issue a formal order of his absorption in the Department of Minority Welfare, State of

¶11

U.P. so that the petitioner may get the consequential benefits of service including his promotions in the said department. The order impugned dated 08.05.2002 is hereby quashed.

¶12

In the aforesaid terms, the writ petition is allowed , with all consequential benefits.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.1.2024 Arnima

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rishi Nath Singh v. State of U.P.through Secy.Minorites Wakfs and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishi Nath Singh v. State of U.P.through Secy.Minorites Wakfs and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jangali Prasad Upadhyaya Vs State of U.P.through Prin Secy Cooperative and 4 Ors.

Radhey Shyam Verma Vs State of U.P.through Prin Secy Seoncdary Eduation

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P.through Prin Secy Forest and Anors

Ramanand Singh Vs State of U.P. through Its Prin. Secy. Medical Education

Prem Shanker Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru Secreatry Secondary Education and 8 Ors.

Shiv Prakash Dwivedi Vs State of U.P.through Secy Education and 2 Ors.