Ram Prakash Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6817 ALL

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6817 ALL
Judgement Date : 29 June, 2021

Allahabad High Court

Ram Prakash Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 29 June, 2021

Bench: Vivek Chaudhary




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 7
 

 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 13091 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Fisheries, Lko & Ors
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kirti Mishra,Piyush Pathak
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.

The case is taken up through Video Conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for State.

Present writ petition is filed by the petitioner claiming that he was initially appointed on the post of Matsya Prasar Worker on 19.05.1983 in Matsya Palak Vikas Abhikaran, Unnao and has retired from services on 31.10.2020. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that as per law settled by this Court in number of cases including the judgments passed in Writ Petition No.25316 (S/S) of 2017 and Writ-A No.33680 of 2012, petitioner is also entitled for payment of gratuity on his retirement.

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of petitioner would be sufficiently met in case representation of petitioner for the said purposes is considered and decided in a time bound manner.

Learned standing counsel has no objection to the same.

In view thereof, petitioner is permitted to make a fresh detailed representation to respondent no.2 Director, Matsya Nideshaylaya, Ayodhya/Faizabad Road, Babuganj, Lucknow, raising all his grievance, annexing therewith a copy of this writ petition along with annexures and all the documents and judgments of this Court, if any, in support of his claim within a period of three weeks from today along with a certified/print out copy of this order.

In case such a representation is moved by petitioner, respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date a certified/print out copy of this order along with representation is placed before him.

It is made clear that this court has not applied itself on the merits of the case and all questions are left open to be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 29.6.2021

Arti/-