Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Saheb Lal v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 67833 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 21129 (14 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).


Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 67833 of 2006

Saheb Lal


State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J

Petitioner has been performing and discharging duties as Seasonal Collection Amin. Claim of the petitioner for being according substantive status of the Amin under 35% quota was not being adverted to and same was non-suited on the ground of less recovery. In this background petitioner preferred Civil Misc. Writ Petition 5346 of 2001, and this Court on 18.11.2002 allowed said writ petition. Thereafter on 03.07.2006, Selection Committee constituted, considered the matter for grant of regular appointment on the post of Collection Amin under 35% quota and therein petitioner alongwith others has been found to be eligible. In spite of selection proceedings being completed selected incumbents have not been permitted to join and as nothing was being done, in this background Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 54855 of 2005 has been  preferred before this Court and therein this Court directed the authority concerned to decide the matter and thereafter order dated 23.11.2006 has been passed and by means of the same it has been contended that qua 10 incumbents matter has been referred to the State Government for age relaxation and only after order is passed by the State Government, then result would be implemented.

On the presentation of the present writ petition before this Court time was accorded to learned Standing Counsel for obtaining necessary instructions in the matter.

On the matter being taken up today necessary instructions has been obtained and same are to the effect that matter has not been decided by the State Government qua ten incumbents as such no steps are being undertaken, and in case petitioner and other similarly situated incumbent are appointed first then Seniority would be adversely effected.  

Name of 24 incumbents under 35% quota has been finalized and out of these 24 incumbents 10 incumbents are admittedly over age and for according age relaxation in the age matter has already been referred to the State Government.

As per Collection Amin Service Rule 1974 seniority in any category of post has to be determined from the date of order of substantive appointment and as per proviso if appointment order specifies a particular back date with effect from which a person has been substantively appointed, that date, will be deemed to be the date of order of substantive appointment and in other case, it will mean the date of issue of the order.

Here only ground for not giving effect to the outcome of selection proceeding is that matter qua according age relaxation to 10 incumbents, is pending and same will have effect on seniority, it is true that appointment order is issued to petitioner and other similarly situated incumbents then seniority of those 10 incumbents would adversely be effected as per the provision as contained in Rule 21 of the Collection Amin Service Rule 1974. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that seniority of those 10 incumbents be protected and in case age relaxation is accorded to them then they be placed over and above to the aforesaid incumbents and seniority will not be claimed against the aforesaid 10 incumbents.

In these circumstances and in this background Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow, respondent no. 1 is directed to take final decision qua the age relaxation of 10 incumbents within six weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. Petitioner as well as other similarly situated incumbents in case they file affidavit that they will not claim any seniority over and above the aforesaid 10 incumbents whose claim for age relaxation has been referred to the State Government then in that event order of regularization of the Collection Amins be implemented and given effect to. Moment age relaxation is accorded to those incumbents, their placement shall be made over and above petitioner and other similarly situated incumbents. Said exercise shall also be concluded within next six weeks.

With the above observations/direction present writ petition is disposed of .    




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


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 |

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