Dismissed

Dhani Ram Tiwari v. State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. and O

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2024WRIA/5913/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, already regularized on the post of Seenchpal pursuant to a 2010 judgment in earlier litigation and since retired, sought appointment as Seench Parivekshak from the date juniors were appointed with arrears. The court noted laches, prior adjudication of his rights, and dismissed the writ petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dhani Ram Tiwari Vs State of U.P. through Prin… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:11289

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5913 of 2013

¶4

Petitioner :- Dhani Ram Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. And O Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Pal Singh Vishen,Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to press the first prayer made in the present petition, which is quoted hereunder:-

¶9

" Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties more specifically opposite party no. 3 to determine the seniority list of the petitioner, as per Rule-12 of the Amin's Service Rules, 1954 (Irrigation Department) Uttar Pradesh"

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been preferred for commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Seench Parivekshak from the date juniors to him have been so appointed and pay him regular salary with arrears.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present petition as earlier also the petitioner alongwith 8 other persons had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 3535 (S/S) of 1999 for considering their case for regularization on the post of Seench Paryavekshak in the Irrigation Department. The said writ petition was disposed of by judgment and order dated 23.02.2010 on the basis of statement of learned Standing Counsel that all these persons have been regularized on the post of Clerk/Seench Parivekshak/Seenchpal in compliance of the letter dated 27.09.2004 of Chief Engineer (Karmik) Office of the Engineer in Chief (E-4 Kha), Irrigation Department, U.P., Lucknow. It is an admitted case of the petitioner that the he was petitioner no. 7 in that writ petition.

¶12

Against the said judgment dated 23.02.2010, a review petition

¶13

was filed by one of the petitioner, which was dismissed in default by this Court vide its judgment and order dated 04.09.2012. Copies of the said judgments are annexed as annexure no. C.A. 1 and C.A. 2 to the counter affidavit respectively.

¶14

After the judgment dated 23.02.2010, the petitioner has filed the present petition on 29.09.2013 i.e. after more than three and a half years without explaining laches. .

¶15

It is further submitted that the services of the petitioner was regularized on the post of Seenchpal and he has already retired from services.

¶16

The said position has neither been denied nor disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. He is unable to disclose the date of superannuation of petitioner.

¶17

Once the right has been determined by this Court earlier again no order can be passed by this Court contrary to the earlier order/judgment.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶19

Order Date :- 7.2.2024 Ashish

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhani Ram Tiwari v. State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. and O

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dhani Ram Tiwari v. State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. and O

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samar Bahadur Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. P.W.D. and Others

Anuj Kumar Vs High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Thru. Registrar General and 2 Others

Berojgar Audyogik Kalyan Samiti Thru. Its Authorized Person Awdhesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Vocational Edu. and Skill Development Lko. and 5 Others

Smt.Alka Rai Vs State of U.P.through Secy.Social Welfare Dept.Lucknow

Jagat Narayan Pandey Vs State of U.P. through Its Secy.Revenue Lucknow and Ors.

Rajeshwari Patel Vs State of U.P. through the Secy.Mahila Bas Vikas Sewa Evam