Allowed

Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2024WRIA/910/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the respondent authorities to decide on the petitioner's claim for adhoc promotion within four weeks, as one year had elapsed since his promotion file was sealed due to pending criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to decide on adhoc promotion within four weeks.

Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 vs State… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:20964

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 910 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 4 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Singh,Anand Singh Pawar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to open the sealed cover envelop of the petitioner and consider him giving adhoc promotion on the post of Inspector for which the D.P.C. was concluded but petitioner's case was kept in a sealed cover on the ground that the petitioner was facing a criminal case registered at Case Crime No.433/2016, under Sections 342/ 323/ 218/ 201 I.P.C., Police Station - Kayamganj, District- Fatehgarh in which charge-sheet had been filed, however, final decision in the case has not been rendered by the trial court till date as the criminal proceeding of case has been stayed by the court.

¶9

Petitioner's case for promotion, therefore, was kept in sealed cover on 28.02.2023 in pursuance to the para 10 of the Government Order dated 28.05.1997, which provides that if the decision on the criminal case does not come within one year, the employee in respect of whom the sealed cover is adopted because of the pendency of the criminal case, would be considered for giving ad hoc promotion after a period of one year from the date of sealed cover procedure adopted in respect of his promotion.

¶10

Order dated 01.04.2023 issued by the A.S.P. Establishment itself would disclose that petitioner's case for giving him ad hoc promotion would be considered after 28.02.2024. Since petitioner's case for giving him ad hoc promotion pending criminal trial in respect of Case Crime No.433 of 2016 (supra) is still pending, I direct respondent Nos.3 and 4 to take a decision for giving the petitioner ad hoc promotion in pursuance to the Government Order dated 28.05.1997 within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order

¶11

along with appropriate application is placed before respondent No.2.

¶12

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 7.3.2024 S. Kumar

¶14

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

Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 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

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

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

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