Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LALMANI MISRA versus STATE OF U.P.& OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Lalmani Misra v. State Of U.P.& Others - WRIT - A No. 26252 of 2000 [2007] RD-AH 4248 (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. V.M. SAHAI,J.

HON. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

We have heard Sri Pulak Ganguley learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner was working as Chief Registration Clerk. He was promoted on the post of Sub Registrar by order-dated 8.6.1996. Subsequently it was detected by the Government that the correct eligibility list was not prepared and, therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and thereafter they cancelled the entire eligibility list as well as reverted the petitioner to the post of Chief Registration Clerk canceling all the promotion of the persons who were promoted along with the petitioner in pursuance of that eligibility list. Subsequently a correct eligibility list was prepared which was approved by the Commission and promotion orders have been issued and the petitioner's name has been recommended for promotion but before the name of the petitioner could be recommended, he superannuated on 30.6.2001. The result was that the petitioner before his retirement could not be promoted to the post of Sub-Registrar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that since the petitioner has again been promoted, this fact itself speaks that the earlier promotion order of the petitioner was correct. Be that as it may, since the entire eligibility list was not prepared correctly, therefore, it was open to the department to cancel the eligibility list as well as the promotion list after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. Thereafter list was cancelled.

Therefore, in our opinion the reversion of the petitioner from the post of Sub Registrar to the post of Chief Registration Clerk was just and proper. Subsequently, the petitioner has been promoted but before the promotion order could be made, the petitioner superannuated, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. The petitioner shall however, be entitled to the post retiral benefits as well as pension for the post of Chief Registration Clerk. The same shall be released to the petitioner within 4 months.

With the aforesaid directions the writ petition is finally disposed of. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.  

13.3.2007

V.Sri/-

W.P. No.26252 of 2000


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.