KALI CHARAN versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Kali Charan v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 1505 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 664 (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.

Heard counsel for the parties.

The petitioner seeks regular appointment on the strength of his being in continuous service in the Forest Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh as Class IV employee on daily wage basis for last so many years.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. Vs. Putti Lal; 2002 (2) UPLBEC 1595 as well as the judgment dated 29th November, 2004 passed in the case of Visheshwar Vs. Principal Secretary, Forest Anubhag and Others and order dated 22md March, 2005 passed in Special Appeal No. 974 of 2004, Ram Surat Yadav Vs. State of U.P. through Secretary Forest Anubhag and others, as also the order dated 17th October, 2005 passed in Writ Petition  No. 48322 of 2000 in the case of Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Vs. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, U.P. as also upon the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Regularisation of Daily Wages appointment on Group D Posts' Rules, 2001.

This writ petition  is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner may file a representation, along with a certified copy of this order, before the authority concerned annexing the judgments in the cases of State of U.P. Vs. Putti Lal, Visheshwar Vs. Principal Secretary, Forest Anubhag and Others, Ram Surat Yadav Vs. State of U.P. through Secretary, Forest Anubhag and Others, and Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Vs. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, U.P. (Supras), within six weeks from today.  On such a representation being filed, the authority concerned shall decide the matter in the light of the aforesaid judgments within four months from the date the representation is made.

Dated: 10.1.2006

V.R./1505/06

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 |

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