Sanjeev Singh v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Order on Petition

¶1Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri P.K. Shahi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel who appears for respondents No. 1 to 3.

¶2In view of the order which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to respondents No. 4 to 10.

¶3The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed on the post of Lecturer (Electrical) on 13.02.2003 in Digamber Jain Polytechnic, Baraut, District Baghpat he was further promoted on the post of Lecturer (Electrical)/Head of the Department and he was also handed over the charge of Electronics Lab. The writ petitioner claims certain benefits referable to the imparting of education in the evening classes along with other grievances. He claims to have represented his cause before the second respondent, Director, Technical Education, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur.

¶4Sri P.K. Shahi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits submits that the issues which the writ petitioner is claiming needs determination at the first instance by the second respondent, Director, Technical Education, U.P., Kanpur and the writ petitioner may represent his cause before the second respondent and the second respondent shall address the entitlement of the writ petitioner, he further submits that he does not propose to file any response to the writ petition.

¶5To such a submission, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same.

¶6Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed of without seeking any response from the respondents granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer comprehensive representation along with the self attested copy of the writ petition before the second respondent, Director, Technical Education, U.P., Kanpur shall on the receipt of the same thereafter proceed to decide the entitlement of the writ petitioner strictly in accordance with law after putting to notice the fourth, fifth and sixth respondents and thereafter proceed to pass an order strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order.

¶7With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶8Passing of this order may not be construed to be an expression that this Court has adjudicated on the merits of the matter. Order Date :- 29.11.2023 Rajesh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18900 of 2023 Petitioner :- Sanjeev Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Keshari Nath Tripathi,Arvind Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. In Re: Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. Nill of 2023 Amendment has been sought in the relief clause. Since there is no opposition to the same. Amendment application is allowed. Amendment be carried out during the course of the day. Office shall allot regular number to the same.