Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TRILOKI NATH SRIVASTAVA versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. NAGAR VIKAS & ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Triloki Nath Srivastava v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Nagar Vikas & Another - WRIT - A No. 23238 of 2002 [2005] RD-AH 3015 (16 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.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.  23238 of 2002

Triloki Nath Srivastava        Vs.         State of U.P. & others

Hon'ble Dr. B.S.Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the seniority list dated 7.9.2001 being aggrieved that persons who had been shown much junior to the petitioner in the seniority list issued on 5th February, 1991 had been shown senior to him and granted promotions. Thus, it is prayed that the seniority list of 7.9.2001 is liable to be quashed.

Learned Standing Counsel has raised the preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this writ petition that not a single person, who may be adversely affected by the order of this Court in case the petition is allowed, has been impleaded as respondents and thus in view thereof it has been contended that in view of the proviso added to Order I Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure by Amendment Act No. 104 of 1976 the defect is fatal and the writ petition is liable to be rejected on this ground alone.  

This Court had also passed an order on 2nd March, 2005 to implead the persons who may be adversely affected by this order. The petitioner, till today, did not consider it proper to ensure compliance of the said order, though a period of more than six months is over. In such situation this writ petition is liable to be dismissed solely on this ground.

However, it is submitted by Sri Tarun Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have filed counter affidavit stating that the seniority list dated 7.9.2001 impugned herein had already been quashed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court and certain directions have been issued for drawing the seniority list afresh and he would be satisfied if the case of the petitioner is also directed to be considered in the light of the directions issued by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the said judgment dated 3.8.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 3274 of 1997, Mohd. Ahmad Ansari Vs. State of U.P. & others.

Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the case of the petitioner may also be considered in the light of the aforesaid judgment of the Lucknow Bench of this Court.

Dt/-16.9.2005

PS


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.