Dr. Sushma Shukla vs State Of U.P.,Thru. Prin. ...
2019 Latest Caselaw 2782 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 23
 
Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 1016 of 2013
 
Petitioner :- Dr. Sushma Shukla
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.,Thru. Prin. Secy.,Higher Education & Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person,Chandra Vijai,Devendra Pratap Upadhyay,Paras Ram Gupta,Sandeep Dixit
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Pratap Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard Sri Devendra Pratap Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Udai Veer Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.4 and 5.

During the course of arguments, when pin point query was put from learned counsel for the petitioner as to what relief the petitioner is praying for, he has submitted that since the petitioner has been discharging her duties with effect from 2003, therefore, she should be absorbed in the service and her regularization should be considered on the post in question, thereby, she should be paid all consequential service benefits.

Since there is no prayer for absorption or regularization in the prayer clause, therefore, such relief may not be granted to the petitioner.

On that, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he may be permitted to amend the writ petition so that the specific prayer for absorption and regularization may be made.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to file an amendment application within a period of one week and copy thereof be provided to the learned counsel for the opposite parties immediately, so that objection to the amendment application may be filed within one week thereafter.

List this petition on 25.04.2019 within top ten cases.

Order Date :- 10.4.2019

Suresh/

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]