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


Amar Nath Dubey v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 4442 of 1999 [2002] RD-AH 8 (9 April 2002)


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).


[ Court No. 2]

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4442 of 1999

Amar Nath Dubey Vs. State of U.P. and others.


Hon. R.K.Agrawal,J.

The petitioner was appointed as constable in the Police Department in the year 1960. He had submitted his resignation / voluntary retirement on 6.10.1971 was accepted by the authorities concerned on 6.12.1972 w.e.f. 19th July, 1971. According to the petitioner, he wrote a letter on 5.11.1971 followed by subsequent reminders seeking voluntary retirement but no action has been taken. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the letter dated 5.11.1971 and subsequent letters which are alleged to have been sent by the petitioner are not received by the authorities concerned.

Be that as it may, it appears that the petitioner was satisfied with the acceptance of the resignation/voluntary retirement letter as for more than 27 years he did not take any action and filed the present writ petition in the year 1999 seeking writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20th January 1998 passed by the respondent no.2 contained in annexure 9 to the writ petition. He has further sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to grant pension in favour of the petitioner.

Vide order dated 20.1.1998 the respondent no.2 had informed the petitioner that the application dated 16.10.1971 for voluntary retirement has been accepted on 6.12.1972.

I have heard Shri M.D. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner had submitted his resignation / voluntary retirement letter on 6.12.1972  which was accepted. There is nothing on record to show as to whether the petitioner has agitated his matter thereafter. More than 27 years have passed whereafter the petitioner filed the present writ petition . Hence no case for quashing the order dated 20.1.1998 has been made out. So far as the question of payment of pension  and other post retiral benefits are concerned, the petitioner is directed to make a representation before the respondent no.3 alongwith certified copy of this order within one month from today whereupon the respondent no.3 shall look into the matter and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of the representation  and in case any amount is due and payable to the petitioner towards post retiral benefits the same shall be paid within one month from the date of deciding of the representation.

With the above directions/ observations this petition stands disposed of finally.

DT: 9.4.2002



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.