Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SITA RAM versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY P.W.D. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sita Ram v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary P.W.D. And Others - WRIT - A No. 65659 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20421 (1 December 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 65659 of 2006

Sita Ram

Versus

State of U.P. & others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner had been performing and discharging duties as Manager with U.P. State Employee Kalyan Nigam. During his stay at Bijnor petitioner was allotted residential accommodation. Petitioner was transferred from Bijnor in June, 2006. On 05.07.2006 letter was written asking the petitioner to vacate the residential accommodation as same has been allotted to one Sunil Kumar. Petitioner has contended that he represented the matter for permitting him to retain the accommodation but on  on 30.08.2006 application moved has been rejected and directives have been issued to vacate premises in question. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.P. Singh Chauhan contended that petitioner for valid reaons intended to retain residential accommodation but the authority concerned failed to exercise its discretion vested in favour of petitioner, and has arbitrarily rejected the same as such present writ petition deserves to be allowed.

Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that once petitioner has been transferred, then petitioner has no right to retain the residential premises, and as such writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging is to the effect that petitioner was transferred from Bijnor to Moradabad  in June 2006 and during his stay at Bijnor petitioner was allotted residential accommodation. Once petitioner has been transferred from Bijnor to Moradabad then petitioner has got no right to retain the premise in question as incumbents are waiting for their turn to be allotted the residential accommodation who are posted in district Bijnor. Once petitioner have been transferred and said residential accommodation has allotted to another incumbent then District Magistrate is not at all wrong and has rightly rejected the request of the petitioner.

Consequently as petitioner has got no legal right to retain the premises in question as such this Court refuses to interfere with the order impugned. Writ petition lacks substance and is dismissed accordingly.

01.12.2006

Dhruv  


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.