Kishor Kumar Agrwal vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 8844 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7334 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Kishor Kumar Agrwal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ganesh Datt Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents no.1 to 4 and Sri G.D.Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.5.

The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:

"a)To issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to take decision on the Inquiry Report dated 12.10.2017.

b) To issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay all retiral benefits and other dues including outstanding salary.

c) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."

The petitioner, while working as Accounts Clerk/Assistant Accountant in the office of respondent no.5, retired from service on 31.7.2012.

It appears that an order dated 16.8.2013 was passed against the petitioner holding that after calculation of the value of the missing goods, the payment of his dues will be considered.

The petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ A No.18000 of 2014, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 2.4.2014 directing the respondents to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

After the aforesaid judgment of this Court it transpires from the record that an enquiry was instituted against the petitioner and the enquiry committee submitted its report on 12.10.2017, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-13 to the writ petition.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the competent authority has not taken any decision on the enquiry report.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-authorities submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction be issued to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and without going into the merits of the case and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.2 raising all his grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case, such a representation is made, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months thereafter.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 28.7.2021

SKM