Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GAYA PRASAD versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Gaya Prasad v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 13513 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4231 (13 March 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

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel for the respondents. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

It is the case of the petitioner that he has been working as Seasonal Collection Amin since June, 1988. The submission is that as per the rules governing the service of Collection Amins, 35% of the posts of Collection Amins are to be filled up from amongst Seasonal Collection Amins. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of the U.P.Collection Amins Rules, 1974, as amended from time to time, and also in terms of the Government Order dated 21.6.2002 the petitioner would be entitled to regularization as Collection  Amin on the post lying vacant for such purpose. With regard to such grievances the petiitoner has already filed several representations before the authorities which have yet not been decided.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before Collector/District Magistrate, Etah, Respondent no.2, along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Respondent no.2, in accordance with law, by a speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the same.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost.

dt. 13.3.2007

dps

w.p. 13513.07


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.