Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Ram Samujh Mishra & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 18748 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7235 (19 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).


Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Petitioners' case in the writ petition  is that the petitioners were initially  the employees  of the U.P. Government Cement Factory. Subsequently the State Government formed U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd. in the year 1972 and the Government Cement  Factories were transferred in the s aid Corporation. Thereafter the petitioners were treated on deputation till  31st of March, 1981.  Petitioners' case is that  they continued in service  of the Corporation and attained l; the age of retirement on 30th June, 1997, 30th June, 1991,  30th June, 1999,  30th June, 1997, 31st October, 1986, 16th July, 1993, 30th June, 1998 and 30th June, 1997.  Petitioners' case is that they being the State Government employees , were also entitled for the benefit of the  Government order  dated 1.7.1989.  Reliance has been placed on the order of this Court dated  6.4.2005 passed in writ petition  No. 50255 of 2004 Tej Dhar Lal and others Versus  State of U.P. & others by which order  the Court directed the State Government to consider the claim of the petitioners  for the said benefit.  Petitioners' case  that they have also submitted a detailed representation on 7.11.2005 claiming benefit in accordance with the  Government order  dated 1.7.1989 which is said to be pending.  It is contended  that the claims of similarly situated persons were earlier decided by the Government.  Learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that  in view of the fact that they have already filed representation the same may be  decided at an early date.

In the facts of  present case the representation  of the petitioners being pending before the State Government,  ends  of justice be served in disposing of the writ petition  directing the respondent no. 1 consider and take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioners dated 7.11.2005 Annexure-8 to the writ petition  expeditiously.

With the above directions the writ petition  is disposed of.      




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 |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.