Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAMA NAND CHAUDHARY versus THE STATE OF U.P. THRU' PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rama Nand Chaudhary v. The State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Secretary & Others - WRIT - A No. 13626 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4442 (14 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 appearing 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 was initially appointed as seasonal  Collelction Amin the year 1993 and has since then been continuously working. It has been contended that under the U.P.Collection Amins Service Rules, 1974, as amended from time to time, 35% of the posts of Collelction Amins are to be filled up from amongst the seasonal Collelction Amins. The petitioner claims that he being high up in the seniority of seasonal Collection Amins be granted such benefit of appointment as Collection Amin. It has further been contended that the posts of Collection Amins are still lying vacant but the case of the petitioner has not been considered despite the petitioner having filed several representations in this regard.

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 the Collector, Siddharth Nagar, 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, 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. 14.3.2007

dps

w.p. 13626.07


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.