Sanjeev Kumar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sanjeev Kumar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

First prayer (to quash the orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025) rejected; writ petition disposed of with the observation that the concerned respondent (Respondent-4) will consider the minutes of the meeting dated 04.03.2025, if already submitted, within a short period, after hearing the concerned parties if warranted; merits expressly not entered into.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's first prayer - quashing of the orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 appointing Respondent-6 as Cadre Schiv - should be granted (subsequently not pressed by the petitioner). +1 more

Court's answer

The Court rejected the petitioner's first prayer, i.e., the prayer to quash the orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025.

Ratio / Principle

With regard to the second prayer, the writ petition was disposed of with the observation that the concerned respondent will consider the minutes of the meeting dated 04.03.2025, if already submitted, within a short period, after hearing the concerned parties if warranted.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly made clear that it had not entered into the merits of the case at this stage.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - A No. - 3422 of 2025 | High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.) | Order dated 20.3.2025 | Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC:40621. Sanjeev Kumar challenged orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 whereby, on the basis of a proposal adopted by Kisan Seva Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Jhansi, Respondent-6 was appointed as Cadre Schiv. Counsel informed the Court that the Samiti had adopted a resolution in its meeting dated 04.03.2025 that Respondent-6's appointment order be withdrawn; the petitioner accordingly did not press his first prayer (quashing of the impugned orders) and pressed only that Respondent-4, i.e., Sahayak Ayukt Evam Sahayak Upnibandhak, Sahkarita, Jhansi Division, Jhansi, take an appropriate decision on the Samiti's proposal. The Court observed that the Samiti was not before it and that no document showed any subsequent letter for consideration having been communicated to Respondent-4; the Standing Counsel undertook that if such resolution were placed before the respondent, an appropriate decision would be taken within a short period. The Court rejected the first prayer and disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the concerned respondent will consider the minutes of the meeting dated 04.03.2025, if already submitted, within a short period, after hearing the concerned parties if warranted, expressly clarifying that it had not entered into the merits at this stage.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40621

Court No. - 6

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3422 of 2025

Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Umesh Chandra Prajapati Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

Heard Sri U.C. Prajapati, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Meva Lal Gupta, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents.

Petitioner has challenged orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 whereby on basis of proposal adopted by Kisan Seva Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Jhansi, Respondent-6 was appointed as Cadre Schiv.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that subsequently said Sahkari Samiti has adopted a resolution in meeting dated 04.03.2025 that order of appointment of Respondent-6 be withdrawn. He submits that petitioner is not pressing his first prayer to quash the orders dated 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 but he is pressing his second prayer that appropriate decision be taken by Respondent-4, i.e., Sahayak Ayukt Evam Sahayak Upnibandhak, Sahkarita, Jhansi Division, Jhansi on the proposal of Sahkari Samiti.

The said Sahkari Samiti is not before this Court as well as there is no document that Sahkari Samiti has communicated any subsequent letter for consideration to Respondent-4.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents submits that in case such resolution is placed before said respondent, an appropriate decision will be taken within a short

period.

In aforesaid circumstances, first prayer of petitioner is rejected. However, with regard to second prayer, this writ petition is disposed of with observation that concerned respondent will consider the minutes of meeting dated 04.03.2025, if already submitted, within a short period, after hearing concerned parties, if warrants. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into merit of case at this stage.

Order Date :- 20.3.2025 AK

Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad