Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

HARIDASPURI versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY FINANCE AND REVENUE AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Haridaspuri v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Finance And Revenue And Others - WRIT - A No. 1402 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 659 (10 January 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

HON. ARUN TANDON, J.

The claim of the petitioner for regular appointment as Collection Peon has been rejected under the impugned order dated 5.10.2005 on the ground that the petitioner had already attained the age of 45 years and further there is a ban imposed upon appointments under government order as mentioned in the impugned order itself.

So far as first ground mentioned in the impugned order is concerned the same is in accordance with the relevant government order and, therefore, cannot be said to be illegal in any maner.  However under the Government Orders dated 26.6.2000 read with Government Order dated 26.11.2000 a power conferred  grant relaxation in the outer age limit prescribed for such regular appointment and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner is liable to be referred for consideration to the Board of Revenue for relaxation in the outer age limit to similar effect is the judgment of this Court reported in 2001 Vol. 2 UPLBEC Page 1750 (Mohammad Irshad Vs. State of U.P. and others).

So far as the second ground is concerned the same is totally misconceived inasmuch as the State Government has already clarified that the ban imposed is not applicable in cases where regular appointment is to be offered under orders of this Court to Seasonal Collection Amins/Peons.

In view of the aforesaid the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon respondent District Magistrate, Moradabad to refer the claim of the petitioner for relaxation of the outer age limit  to the Board of Revenue with reference to the government order dated 26.6.2000 read with government order dated 26.11.2000 within four weeks from today.  Board of Revenue may take a decision in respect thereto within four weeks, thereafter.

Till such decision respondents may offer seasonal work to the petitioners in accordance with the seniority.

Dated: 10.1.2006

V.R./1402/06


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.