Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Panna Lal v. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. & Others - WRIT - A No. 11188 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 3416 (28 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).


Court No.1

    Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11188 of 2007

Panna Lal                  versus    U.P.Power Corporation Ltd.,

                                                Lucknow and others.

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J

           Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The petitioner retired from the service of Corporation on 30.6.2004. His grievance is that he has not been paid the retiral dues except 90% of the gratuity and GPF. He made representations dated 28.7.2006,5.8.2006 and 4.9.2006 regarding non-payment of his retiral dues before respondent no.5 and has also filed representation before the District Magistrate, Hathras on 25.9.2006.

It appears that by letter dated 18.10.2006 the petitioner was required to submit an affidavit, which is alleged to have already been submitted by the petitioner, however, neither his representation is being decided nor his retiral dues have been paid till date.

The only prayer of the counsel for the petitioner at this stage is that a direction may be issued to respondent no.3 to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 25.9.2006 within a time bound frame fixed by this Court.

Sri R. D. Khare, counsel for the respondents states that he will verify the fact whether all the retiral dues have been paid to the petitioner or not but he has no objection to the prayer of counsel for the petitioner for direction to the authority concerned   for deciding the representation within a time bound frame.

In the circumstances without entering into the merits of the controversy involved in this case, the petition is disposed of finally with a direction to respondent no.3 to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 25.9.2006 by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with copy of the representation.  

The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order before respondent no.3 within 15 days from today.

In the mean time, if any amount towards retiral dues  is due which is payable to the petitioner shall also be paid to him by the Corporation.

Dated 28.2.2007




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 |

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