RADHE SHYAM AND OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Radhe Shyam And Others v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 18165 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 6350 (6 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 petitioner that he has been working on a Class IV post on daily wage basis since 1979. He claims that in terms of the Regularization Rules, 2001, the petitioner would be entitled to be regularized on a Class IV post as he has been working since prior to the cut of date mentioned in the said Rules. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has filed several representations in this regard but the respondent-authorities have not yet passed any orders on the same.

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. 2, the Director, Horticulture, Udyan Bhawan, 2-Sapru Road, Lucknow 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.

It is further provided that in case if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to regularization under the said Rules, his case shall be placed before the Selection Committee constituted for the such purpose.  

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

Dt/-6.4.2007

p.s.

w.p.18165.07

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

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.