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


Bhutendra Kumar Singh v. Chairman-Cum-Managing Director U.P. Police & Anr. - WRIT - A No. 48538 of 2003 [2007] RD-AH 7269 (20 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 Anjani Kumar, J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

In short, the grievance of the petitioner is that he is working as Junior Engineer in U.P. Police Awas Vikas Nigam Limited and in the gradation list, is at serial no. 1 amongst the Junior Engineers belonging to scheduled caste category. In the year 1997, the petitioner was superseded for promotion on the post of Assistant Engineer on account of certain adverse entries pertaining to the years 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. He filed a claim petitioner no. 2482 of 1997 before U.P. Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow, which was allowed vide order dated 15.12.2000 passed by the Tribunal quashing the adverse entries of 1992-93 and 1993-94 holding that the entries of the years 1994-95 and 1995-96 are only suggestive in nature and cannot be treated adverse against the petitioner for the purpose of promotion, crossing of efficiency bar and other service matters. Thereafter, the petitioner made representation dated 28.4.2001 to the respondent no. 1 requesting that he should be reconsidered in the light of expunction of the adverse entries for the purpose of promotion, but his case has not been considered so far causing irreparable loss to the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that in case, such a representation is pending before respondent no. 1, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously.

In view of the aforesaid statement and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of this writ petition finally directing the respondent no. 1 to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferable within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with the aforesaid representation before him.

Dt. 20.4.2007



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.