Jay Prakash Verma @ Jai Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12410 of 2024 Petitioner :- Jay Prakash Verma @ Jai Prakash Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Pandey,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶2With the consent of parties, this petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

¶3By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- "(i) to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 27.11.2024, 30.11.2024 and 02.12.2024 passed by the Director Panchayati Raj, U.P., Lucknow (respondent no. 2) as contained in Annexure No. 1 to 3 to the writ petition.

¶4It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Safai Karamchari on

24.11.2009. The services of the petitioner was confirmed on

21.01.2015. It is further submitted that the petitioner moved an application before the Deputy Director Panchayat Raj Division, Faizabad on 07.02.2015 seeking his transfer from Sultanpur to Ayodhya on compassionate ground. The petitioner again moved a representation on 05.05.2016 before the Deputy Director Panchayat Faizabad Division, Faizabad. The authority considered the request of the petitioner by means of order dated

20.06.2016 and services of the petitioner was attached from Sultanpur to Ayodhya and since then the petitioner was working at District Panchayat Raj Office, Kajipur, Vishwa Maya Bazar.

¶5It has further been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that by means of the impugned order dated

27.11.2024 the attachment of the petitioner has been cancelled.

¶6After arguing at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent no. 2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner on compassionate ground.

¶7Learned Standing Counsel does not object to the prayer made by the petitioner.

¶8In light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2 within next ten days from today, who shall consider and decide the same within six weeks thereafter by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioner accordingly. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Virendra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench