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


Deelip Kumar v. Chairman/M.D., U.P. Power Corporation Ltd., Lucknow & Others - WRIT - A No. 15770 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 6416 (23 March 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.7

Civil Misc. Writ No. 15736 of 2006

Uma Kant Mihsra                                 ...          Petitioner


State of U.P and others.                                 Respondents

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J

           Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on the post of Tracer in Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. Povayan, Shahjahanpur in 1989.

It is alleged that the General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill Povayan, Shahjahanpur sent a letter to respondent no.3 for considering the application of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Draftsman. It is further alleged that the petitioner is working continuously on the post of Draftsman but the respondent-authorities are not paying him salary to the post of Draftsman. He has made a representation-dated 10.2.2006 before respondent no.2, General Manager, Sugar Mill Povayan, Shahjahanpur in this regard which has remained unactioned till date.

The only prayer of the counsel for the petitioner at this stage is that a direction may be issued to respondent no.2 to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 10.2.2006 within a time bound frame fixed by this Court.

The standing counsel has no objection to this prayer.

In the circumstances, the petition is disposed of finally with a direction to respondent no.2 to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 10.2.2006 by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of submission of a certified copy of this order.

The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order before respondent no.2 within 15 days from today.

Dated 23.3.2006




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.