Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PHEROO SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Pheroo Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. - 55348 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 17884 (15 November 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

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and Sri J. N. Singh appearing for the respondent No. 5.

By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the appointment of respondent no. 5 dated 31.5.2007. Petitioner's case in the writ petition is that the selection for appointment as Block Coordinator was held in which the petitioner has also applied. Petitioner's case is that one Krishan Kumar Yadav was earlier selected but as he was ineligible, his appointment was cancelled. The case of the petitioner is that his name is at serial no. 1 and he should be appointed but Ravindra Kumar Pandey has been appointed on temporary basis by order dated 31,5,2007 although he has not been selected. Learned counsel appearing for Ravindra Kumar Pandey submitted that he was appointed on 31.5.2007 and is still working and there is no material on record to show that the petitioner was selected at serial No. 1.

After considering the submissions of both the parties it is clear that the grievance of the petitioner has to be examined by the authorities them- selves. Petitioner's further case is that the representation has already been submitted to the Basic Shiksha Adhikari claiming appointment on the post of Block Coordinator which is still pending and has not yet been disposed of.

In view of aforesaid ends of justice be served in disposing of the writ petition directing the Basic Shiksha Adhikari to consider and take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner after giving notice to the respondent no. 5 in accordance with law. The said decision shall be taken expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

With the above observations the writ petition is disposed of.

D/-15.11.2007

SCS/55348


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.