Disposed

Ajmat Husain v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC15 May 2024WRIA/3798/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a writ petition seeking directions for minimum pay-scale revision, the court, without entering merits, directed the respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 06.04.2024 within two months.

Ajmat Husain vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37095

¶2

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3798 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ajmat Husain Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Tushar Bhushan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶4

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

¶5

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 alongwith 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).

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Class-IV post in January, 2011 and he has continuously been functioning on the said post. After coming of 7th Pay Commission, the petitioner has made representation dated 06.04.2024 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.

¶7

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 hereinabove within the time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

¶8

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

¶9

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 06.04.2024 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.

¶10

Order Date :- 15.5.2024/J. K. Dinkar

¶11

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

Ajmat Husain v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajmat Husain v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. 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

Smt. Anari Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Rameshwar Prasad Maurya and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Cooperative Lko. and Others

Sanjeev Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Horticulture Food Processing Lko. and 2 Others

Ajmat Husain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shree Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Roli Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Rural Development Lko. and 6 Others