HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23862 of 2011 Petitioner :- Pati Ram & Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Petitioner Counsel :- S.M.Upadhyay Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
In paragraph 9 of the writ petition petitioner has proceeded to mention that his recovery is more than 70% as per norms fixed by the State Government, but his services have not been regularized. Most surprising feature of the writ petition is that in respect of said statement of fact, entry recorded on page 27 of the paper book has been perused, which shows that in respect of only one fasli recovery of the petitioner is 70%, but rest of three faslis, there is no documentary evidence to show that recovery is more than 70% in other three faslis. Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner requests that reasonable time be accorded in order to enable him to file supplementary affidavit to bring on record the documentary evidence to the effect that recovery of the petitioner is more than 70% in other three faslis.
Request made is accepted. three weeks' time is accorded for the said purpose.
List this petition after three weeks.
Order Date :- 26.4.2011 SRY