Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DORI LAL versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dori Lal v. State Of U.P. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 875 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 16655 (12 October 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

CJ's Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Appeal (Defective) No. 875 of 2007

Dori Lal, son of Sri Ram Bharose Lal, resident of Durga Nagar, Bareilly, Post Bareilly, District Bareilly, presently posted as Lekhpal, Tehsil Bareilly Sadar, District Bareilly

versus

1.State of U.P. through Secretary, Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow.

2.District Magistrate/Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bareilly.

3.Deputy Collector, Sadar, Bareilly.

4.Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar,District Bareilly.

*****

Present : Mr. S.N. Shukla, for the Appellant

Mr. Y.K. Srivastava, Standing counsel for respondents-State.

CORAM: Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, C.J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Date: October 11, 2007

Oral Judgment (Per:H.L. Gokhale, C.J.)

1.Heard Sri S.N. Shukla, in support of this appeal. Sri Y.K. Srivastava, learned standing counsel appears for State-respondents.

2.The appellant is a Clerk in Revenue department. The appellant sought his transfer from Tehsil Meerganj to Bareilly Sadar on the ground of illness of his wife, which was granted on 30th June, 2007. However, the same was cancelled due to the exigency of work. He challenged this by filing a writ petition which the learned Single Judge has dismissed. It is noticed that transfer is an exigency to service. The place wherefrom the appellant was transferred to Bareilly is stated to be about 40 kms. from Bareilly. The appellant was posted in that very place earlier. If the petitioner has any grievance due to his personal hardships, he is at liberty to make a representation to the authorities concerned. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of Hon'ble Single Judge. Appeal is dismissed.

Date:11.10.2007

PS

(Chief Justice)

(Sudhir Agarwal, J)

Special Appeal (Defective) No. 875 of 2007

Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, C.J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Date: October 11, 2007

P.C.

1. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant Sri S.N. Shukla and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents.

2. The application seeks condonation for delay in filing the appeal.

3. We accept the explanation given in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application.

4. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Appeal be given regular number.

Date:11.10.2007

PS

(Chief Justice)

(Sudhir Agarwal, J.)


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.