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


Sadhu Ram v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. & Others - WRIT - A No. 26038 of 2003 [2006] RD-AH 11982 (21 July 2006)


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).



This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

"i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari  call for the records of D.P.C. by which name of the respondent no.6 and 7 were recommended to the respondent no.5 for promotion of Assistant Geophysicist and quash the same,

ii) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus restrained the respondent no.5 to not finalize the promotion of the respondent no.6 and 7.

iii) issue further writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to recommend and promote the petitioner on the post of Assistant Geophysicist.

iv) issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

v) Award the cost of the writ petition to be petitioner."

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Ajit Kumar Singh   and Sri S.K. Tyagi for the respondents.

The petitioner submits that as the respondents no.6 and 7 are junior to the petitioner but they are going to be promoted on the next higher post. The writ petition was entertained and an order was passed that one post should be kept vacant.

It has been brought to the notice of the Court by the respondents that the question of seniority between the petitioner and the respondents is still attaining the attention of the U.P. State Public Service Tribunal and the matter is still pending. In my opinion the petitioner is availing a remedy regarding his seniority and unless and until the question of seniority is decided the petitioner cannot challenge that he is senior or respondents no.6 and 7 are senior. As the claim petition is still pending, it is open to the petitioner to make an application in case some order is being passed regarding the promotion to the respondents.

With these observations the writ petition is dismissed.



W.P. 26038 of 2003


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.