Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM SARAN SHARMA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Saran Sharma v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 6203 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 1869 (6 February 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 OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 6203 of 2007

Ram Saran Sharma  

Vs.

State of U.P. and others  

Hon. Sanjay Misra, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.P.Gupta for the respondent nos.2,3 and 4 as also learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent no.4 to give subsistence allowance to the petitioner from the date of suspension till the conclusion of disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner. He contends that a  charge sheet has been served upon him and he has filed reply to the same. It is also stated that by virtue of the provision in the order of suspension dated 25.4.2005 the petitioner is entitled  to the subsistence allowance during the period of suspension under regulation 59 of Uttar Pradesh Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralised Services Regulation 1978. However the respondents are not paying the same to the petitioner and the petitioner is facing great financial hardship on that account. It is also contended that  he has been making various applications to the authority concerned, however till today no such suspension allowance has been paid to him.

Learned counsel for the respondents  contends that the payment of subsistence allowance under regulation 59 is subject to the completion of certain  formalities as has been provided  in the suspension order itself.  Since the petitioner has not submitted the necessary certificate before the authority concerned, he can not be paid the said allowance.

-2-

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties it is provided that  in case the petitioner complies with the requirement as stipulated in the order of suspension with respect to furnishing of necessary certificate the respondents shall ensure  that the petitioner is paid subsistence allowance  in accordance with the aforesaid regulation within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them.

With the aforesaid directions,  the writ petition is disposed of finally. No order is passed as to costs.

6.2.07

Gc.


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.