Disposed

Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024WRIA/9502/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petitioner, an Assistant Consolidation Officer denied promotion due to pending trial/punishment, sought a direction for the U.P. Public Services Tribunal to decide his Claim Petition expeditiously. The court directed the Tribunal to decide within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the U.P. Public Services Tribunal to consider and decide the Claim Petition No. 2297 of 2021 filed by the petitioner within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is pr

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71134

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9502 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mahendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya),Chandrika Prasad,Sonal Bajpai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Raj Kumar Upadhyaya, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

According to Shri R.K. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for petitioner, the petitioner who was working on the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer is seeking promotion to the post of Consolidation Officer but his promotion has not been considered only on account of the fact that he has been awarded punishment dated 0406.2018. Further submission is that the petitioner has already challenged the said punishment order dated 4.6.2018 before the U.P. Public Services Tribunal by filing Claim Petition No. 2297 of 2021.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner confines his prayer only to the extent that a direction may be issued to the U.P. Public Services Tribunal to consider and decide his Claim Petition No. 2297 of 2021 expeditiously.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to this innocuous prayer made by the petitioner.

¶10

In light of the above, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the U.P. Public Services Tribunal to consider and

¶11

decide the Claim Petition No. 2297 of 2021 filed by the petitioner within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, if there is no legal impediment.

¶12

Learned counsel for petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the proceedings before the Public Services Tribunal.

¶13

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 22.10.2024 Virendra

¶15

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

Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dhan Raj Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Panchayat Raj Lukcnow and Ors.

Sandeep Kumar Mishra Vs District Magistrate Sultanpur and Another

Brijesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Panchayati Raj Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Ilyas vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Rural Development, Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Sager and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Its General Manager Mn. of Railways Rail Bhavan and 2 Others

Sakir Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Food and Civil Supplies Lko. and 4 Others