Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. SHAKUNTLA SHUKLA versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Shakuntla Shukla v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 14268 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4708 (16 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 respondent. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

The case of the petitioner is that she retired from the Government Service on 30.6.1991. Her husband, who is dependant on the petitioner, had undergone treatment in September 2005 for which more than Rs.1.5 lacs expenses had been incurred by the petitioner. The petitioner claims that in terms of the Government Order dated 9.8.2004 the petitioner would be entitled for the imbursement of such medical expenses but despite the petitioner having filed several representations before the respondent-authorities with regard to such grievances, but no order has yet been passed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and keeping in view the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that in case if, with regard to her grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before the Director, Pension Directorate, U.P. Lucknow, respondent no.3, alongwith a certified copy of this order alongwith all the documents on which the petitioner relies  with regard to her claim, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent no.3, in accordance with law by a speaking order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of the same.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to cost.

Dt/-16.3.2007

Ru

w.p.14268.07


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.