Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

OM PAL SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Om Pal Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 32773 of 2004 [2004] RD-AH 590 (19 August 2004)

 

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 Rakesh Tiwari, J.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the petitioner for grant of regular appointment as Collection Amin and till then to grant him appointment as Seasonal Collection Amin regularly.

The petitioner alleges to have worked as Collection Peon from time to time since 12.9.1988 in the Tehsil Budhana district Muzaffarnagar till 1992 and worked as Collection Amin in the same Tehsil Budhana district Muzaffarnagar from time to time since 18.8.1992. Thereafter he was transferred on the same post of Collection Amin in Tehsil Shamli district Muzaffarnagar and has worked there from time to time since 7.8.1999 till 30.1.2004. In this way the petitioner alleges to have worked for a total period of 2301 days. The petitioner further alleges that his name finds place in both the seniority lists of Collection Amins. His grievance is that seven persons junior to him in the seniority lists have been granted regular appointment ignoring him though he is senior and was entitled to be considered for regular appointment.    

The only prayer of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner may be permitted to file a comprehensive and detailed representation to respondent no. 3 which may be directed to be decided within a time bound period to be fixed by the Court.  

Standing Counsel has no objection to this prayer.

In case the petitioner submits such a representation within two weeks from today along with certified copy of this order the same shall be decided by respondent no. 3 by a reasoned/speaking order in accordance with law within a period of three weeks thereafter.  

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Dated: 19.8.2004

Rpk/32773-04


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.