Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MOHD.ARSHAD KHAN versus U.P.ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mohd.Arshad Khan v. U.P.Electricity Board And Others - WRIT - A No. 29177 of 1991 [2005] RD-AH 2897 (15 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

                                                                                                        Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29177 of 1991

Mohd. Arshad Khan Vs. U.P. Power Corporation

Limited Lucknow & others  

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri R.D.Khare, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

The brief facts of this case are that the petitioner had undergone apprenticeship training in the year 1986-87 and again in the year 1988. He claims that by virtue of having undergone such apprenticeship training with the respondent-Corporation (earlier U.P. State Electricity Board), he would be entitled to be absorbed in the service of the respondent-Corporation. In support of such contention, the petitioner has relied on decision of the Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and another Vs. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs  Berozgar Sangh and others (1995) S.C.C.1; U.P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad Apprentice Welfare Association and another Vs. State of U.P. and another (2000) 5 S.C.C. 438. It has further been contended that the petitioner is otherwise eligible for appointment in the corporation.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties as well as 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 relating to absorption of the petitioner in the service of the respondent-Corporation, the petitioner files a comprehensive representation before the Executive Manager, Electricity District Division Ist U.P. Power Corporation Limited, Mirzapur, respondent no.2 along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law, by the said respondent after considering the aforementioned decisions of the Apex Court (photo copies of which shall also be annexed by the petitioner along with the representation), expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three 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/-15.9.2005

Ru


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.