Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATYA NARAYAN AND OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satya Narayan And Others v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 17887 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 6272 (5 April 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 petitioners that they have all been working as Seasonal Collection Peons since long. It has been submitted that in terms of the U.P. Collection Pens Service Rules, 2004, 50% of the posts of Collection Peons are to be filled up from amongst the Seasonal Collection Peons and the remaining 50% by direct recruitment. The submission is that there are posts of Collection Peons lying vacant but the respondent-authorities are not taking any steps for filling up the posts of Collection Peons from amongst the Seasonal Collection Peons. It has been submitted that on the basis of seniority, the petitioner would be entitled to be considered for the same but no action has been taken despite the petitioners 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 finally 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 respondent no. 3, the Collector, Jaunpur alongwith a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of filing of the same.

Dt/-5.4.2007

p.s.

w.p.17887.07


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.