Dayaram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 5 Others

Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9498 of 2023 Petitioner :- Dayaram Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Basic Education Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Pathak,Ganesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no.1 to 5.

¶2No notice be issued to respondent no.6 taking into consideration the nature of order proposed to be passed.

¶3With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being decided finally.

¶4The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite the recommendat6ion and approval of respondent no.4 for grant of selection grade pay scale/promotional pay scale the same has still not been provided to the petitioner.

¶5Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before respondent no.5 which may be directed to be decided within a time frame fixed by this Court to which learned counsels for respondents have no objection.

¶6In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before respondent no.5 then respondent no.5 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of submission of the representation along with certified copy of this order.

¶7With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed off.

¶8It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. Order Date :- 16.12.2023 A. Katiyar High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench