Disposed

Santosh Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Services and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2024WRIA/7225/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a departmental order imposing a one-month salary increment withholding. Due to bar on statutory appeal and expired time limit, Court granted temporary liberty to file a delayed appeal. Writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file delayed statutory appeal within one week; matter disposed.

Santosh Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:60108

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7225 of 2024 Petitioner :- Santosh Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical And Health Services And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Madhav Shukla,Rama Niwas Pathak

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Krishna Madhav Shukla (K.M. Shukla), learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Uttam Kumar Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶7

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the Chief Medical Officer, District-Ayodhya whereby awarding the punishment to the petitioner withholding one increment of salary.

¶8

3. On being asked as to why the petitioner has not filed a statutory appeal, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the period of appeal has been expired, therefore, the petitioner could not file the appeal. He has also submitted that the impugned order is illegal on the face of it.

¶9

4. Be that as it may, since there is proscription of statutory appeal under Rule 11 of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999, therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, liberty is given to the petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal before the appellate authority within a period of one week from today taking all pleas and grounds which are available with her annexing therewith the relevant documents in support of her claim and if such appeal is filed by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time before the appellate authority, as per rules, the Appellate Authority shall consider and dispose of the aforesaid appeal on merits, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a speaking and reasoned order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner ignoring the delay in filing the appeal and final order shall be passed with expedition preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with an appeal.

¶10

5. In view of the aforesaid terms, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶11

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶12

Order Date :- 2.9.2024 Suresh/

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Services and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Services and 3 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Kumar and 37 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Deptt. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Vipin Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 3 Others

Smt. Kusum Kumari Vs State of U.P.. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Horticulture and Food Processing, and Another

Smt. Sita Pati vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication Deptt. Post and 4 Others

Shamsher Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rabiya Begum vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative, Lko. and 3 Others