Om Prakash Tiwari vs State Of U.P. And Others
2014 Latest Caselaw 3687 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 24245 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Om Prakash Tiwari
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Chand Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.

Hon'ble Dinesh Maheshwari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

Prayer in this petition is for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent No.2 to forthwith decide the representation of the petitioner dated 02.09.2011.

During the course of argument learned counsel for the petitioner comes up with the prayer that if matter is directed to be decided within a time bound frame then petitioner may get justice.

As this petition is being disposed of at the first hearing with a view that the order which is being passed is innocuous and that is not to hurt anybody, the liberty is to be given to the person who may feel aggrieved by this order to move appropriate application for recall/modification of this order.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not to go into the merits of the matter and to express any opinion but at the same time we propose to dispose of this petition by giving following directions-

i) Petitioner is to file certified copy of this order along with fresh representation annexing copy of earlier representation, if any, and other papers on which reliance is sought to be placed for redressal of his grievance within a period of fifteen days from today before the competent authority.

ii) On receipt of the move it will be the concern of the concerned competent authority to take appropriate decision, by a speaking order within shortest possible time preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the move.

iii) If the claim of the petitioner has already been adjudicated or it is otherwise not maintainable or he is not entitled to get the same then reasons will be given in the order.

iv) If petitioner fails to file copy of this order within the time so allowed then no consideration will be required.

v) At the time of deciding representation as permitted if opportunity of hearing is required to be given to any person who can feel himself aggrieved by the order of the competent authority then that is to be afforded.

It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on merits as we have not gone into the merits of the petitioner's claim and thus decision of the concerned competent authority will be his independent exercise as may be permissible in law.

With the aforesaid directions, this petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 28.7.2014

aks