Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KAILASH CHANDRA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kailash Chandra v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 59435 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2536 (8 September 2005)

 

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 respondent no. 1 and Sri H.D. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents no. 2 and 3. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

By order dated 23.8.2004 passed by respondent no. 3, under the directions of the Chairman of the Zila Panchayat, Farrukhabad the petitioner was appointed as temporary driver on payment of Rs. 84/- per day. According to the petitioner he has since then been working as driver regularly without any break. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is not being paid wages at the rate on which he was engaged vide order dated 23.8.2004 and thus a direction may be issued to the respondents to pay him his regular wages and also to regularize him in service. With regard to such grievances, the petitioner has already filed several representations before the respondent-authorities which have yet not been decided.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and with their consent and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before respondent No. 2, the Chairman, Zila Panchayat, Farrukhabad alongwith a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the same.

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

Dt/-8.9.2005

ps

w.p.59435.05


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.