Disposed

Ravi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Forest Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2024WRIA/3170/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed seeking a direction to the Deputy Director, Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, to consider and decide the petitioner's representation regarding the grant of minimum pay-scale under the 7th Pay Commission within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 11.03.2024 within two months.

Ravi vs State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Forest Deptt… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31599

¶2

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3170 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ravi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Secy. Forest Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Tushar Bhushan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶4

Present writ petition has been filed for issuing a direction to the respondent no. 2-The Deputy Director, Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, Pallia Kala, Lakhimpur Kheri to forthwith grant the minimum of the pay-scale of Rs. 18,000/- as per 7th Pay Commission along with arrears since March, 2018 in terms of the judgment and order dated 17.11.2018 passed by this Court in Writ A No. 11964 of 2018 (Mohan Swaroop and Another Vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Class-IV post in April, 2008 and he has continuously been functioning on the said post. After coming of 7th Pay Commission, the petitioner has made representation dated 11.03.2024 before respondent no. 2 for grant of minimum of pay scale of Rs. 18000/- as per 7th Pay Commission but no decision has been taken by the respondent no. 2 and the matter is still pending.

¶6

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that respondent no. 2 may be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner mentioned herein-above within the time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶8

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without entering into the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 11.03.2024 in accordance with law and keeping in view the judgment and order dated 17.11.2018 passed by this Court in the case of Mohan Swaroop (supra) within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶9

Order Date :- 23.4.2024/Ashutosh

¶10

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Forest Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Forest Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Deependra Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Manish Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Horticulture and Food Processing Lko. and 2 Others

State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others Vs Hakimuddin

Shri Raisul Hasan and 2 Others vs M/S S.K. Carrier Kanpur Thru. Manager and 2 Others

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another

Brijendra and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Forest Lko. and 6 Others