Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ABAY SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Abay Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 50086 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 15829 (12 September 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Amitava Lala, J.

Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed that the respondents should be restrained from making recovery of the amount disclosed in the letter dated 12th August, 2005 as well as his eviction from the accommodation allotted to him till the alternative accommodation is not allotted. However, he has given up the second prayer and contended that since the recovery is wanted to be made under the order impugned from his salary, this Court can interfere with the matter. Since the matter is in connection with non-recovery of amount from the salary of the petitioner in view of the Annexure-2 to the writ petition and since one of the learned Single Judge of this Court has already held in the case of constable by delivering a judgement dated 10th May, 2000 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22147 of 2000 (Head Constable 14 (AP) Hari Mohan Pandey Vs. Senior Superitendent of Police, Allahabad and another) that if any police officer is posted in the district and is transferred within the district, then his possession in the earlier house allotted to him does not become unauthorised and they may be permitted to reside in the accommodation already allotted to them, we are of the view and hereby direct that the authorities concerned will consider the matter before deducting the amount from the salary of the petitioner upon giving fullest opportunity of hearing and by passing a reasoned order thereon within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order along with his representation. For the purpose of effective adjudication a copy of the writ petition along with its annexures can be treated as part and parcel of the representation. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

No order is passed as to costs.          

Dt./-12.09.2006.

SKT/-50086-06.


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.