Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VED NARAIN BAJPAI versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ved Narain Bajpai v. State Of U.P. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1131 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14658 (29 August 2007)

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 AT ALLAHABAD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD.

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Appeal No. 1131 of 2007.

1. Ved Narain Bajpai, S/o Late Babu Lal Bajpai,

Assistant Teacher, Junior High School, Baradari

District Kanpur Nagar.

Vs.

1. State of U.P., through Secretary, Basic Education,

U.P., Lucknow.

2. District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur City, District,

Kanpur Nagar.

3. Assistant Basic Education Director, Kanpur Mandal,

Kanpur.

4. Account Officer in the office of District Basic Education

Officer, Kanpur Nagar.

*****

Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Rai

Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. G.C. Upadhyaya

(Standing Counsel)

Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, CJ.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.

Date : August 29, 2007

Oral Judgement (Per : H.L. Gokhale, CJ)

1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Rai in support of this appeal, Sri G.C. Upadhyaya, learned Standing Counsel appears for respondents.

2. The appellant seeks to challenge the order passed by learned single Judge, whereby he has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner.

3. The appellant was placed under suspension in the year 1994. Subsequently he was re-instated in July, 1996. While reinstating him, the appellant was denied additional payment over and above the subsistence allowance, which was paid to him in the intervening period. The appellant has sought to challenge this order after ten years by filing writ petition. The learned single Judge has taken a view that obviously the petitioner has accepted the order, which was passed while reinstating him. Such an order is undoubtedly permissible when the order of reinstatement was passed. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by learned single Judge.

4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Date : 29.08.2007.

Rks/

(Chief Justice)

(Anjani Kumar)


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.