Allahabad High Court
Pramod Kumar @ Shri Chand And ... vs State Of U.P. & Others on 14 October, 2014
Bench: Rajan Roy
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 59
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 49039 of 2008
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar @ Shri Chand And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- C.V.S. Raghuvansi,Miss Sunita Sharma,Sukhendu Pal Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
In Re. : Amendment application.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
An application for amendment has been filed. The amendment proposed to be made is in respect to the prayer in the writ petition. The petitioners by way of an amendment are seeking "all benefits w.e.f. 4.10.1998 treating them in service since 4.10.2008 including arrears of salary and allowances from 4.10.2000 treating petitioner no. 4 Satyendra Singh as having expired while in harness/service". This relief is sought to be added in prayer no. 2 after the words ' to appoint the petitioners on the post of sweeper.
Small amendment has also been sought in by adding a relief prior to prayer no. 1.
So far as petitioner no. 4 is concerned, unfortunately he expired on 24.12.2012, during pendency of the writ petition. The writ petition was filed seeking a writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned select list dated 29.8.2008 issued by D.P.R.O. Bijnor and for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to appoint the petitioners on the post of sweeper.
As the petitioner no. 4 has died, in my view , the right to sue does not survive in favour of legal heirs.
Petitioner no. 4 was not selected. Being aggrieved he filed this writ petition. The injury, if any, being personal, right to sue does not continue with the legal heirs.
So far other petitioners are concerned, the amendment is allowed only in respect to them.
In view of above, the amendment proposed to be added in relief no. 2 shall not include the word ' to treat petitioner no. 4 Satyedra Singh as having expired whilst in harness in service'
Application for amendment is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Application is allowed.
Amendment, as aforesaid be carried out within ten days.
Order Date :- 14.10.2014
M.A.A.
.
.
.
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 49039 of 2008
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar @ Shri Chand And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- C.V.S. Raghuvansi,Miss Sunita Sharma,Sukhendu Pal Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
In Re. : Substitution application.
Petitioner no. 4 had challenged the selection wherein he had not been found to be successful. The injury, if any, being personal to him, the right to sue does not continue with his legal heirs.
The application for substitution is mis-conceived and the same is rejected.
Writ petition in so in relates to petitioner no. 4 stands abated.
Order Date :- 14.10.2014
M.A.A.
.
.
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 49039 of 2008
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar @ Shri Chand And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- C.V.S. Raghuvansi,Miss Sunita Sharma,Sukhendu Pal Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioner on 24.9.2014.
Respondents may, if they so choose, file counter affidavit to the same before the next date.
List this case in the 3rd week of November, 2014.
Respondents may also, if they so chose file counter affidavit to the amended portion of the writ petition.
Order Date :- 14.10.2014
M.A.A.
