Allahabad High Court
Krishna Prasad Dixit vs State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. ... on 25 July, 2022
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4571 of 2022
Petitioner :- Krishna Prasad Dixit
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Civil Secrett. Lucknow And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Gautam
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Sri Rahul Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Naib Tehsildar/Registrar Kanoongo along with other consequently service benefits as the petitioner is senior-most candidate as has been recorded by the Selection committee in the year 1989.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner was appointed as an Collection Amin on 30.09.1989 on the post of Regular Collection Amin. As the services of the petitioner was not confirmed, he approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 4731 (SS) of 1991 and by means of order dated 09.08.1991, this Court had provided that petitioner shall be allowed to work and shall also be paid his salary, and no break to create artificial break shall be made.
4. Subsequently, with regard to regularization, the petitioner had again approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 8346 (SS) of 2008 where this Court had directed the respondents that mere non-achievement of target for collection cannot be a criteria to be taken into account for purposes of regularization. and hence directed the respondents to considered the claim of the petitioner for regularization along with other similar Seasonal Collection Amins.
5. The claim of the petitioner was rejected on 10.03.2020 which was further assailed by the petitioner before this Court in Writ Petition No. 24659 (SS) of 2020 which was allowed and respondents were directed to take a decision with regard to regularization of the services of the petitioner subject to which the services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 24.12.2021.
6. Learned Standing Counsel had submitted that the order dated 24.12.2021 was passed in pursuance of the judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 24659 (SS) of 2020, a decision has been taken by the State Government to file a special appeal.
7. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that till date no special appeal has been preferred.
8. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is noticed that services of the petitioner have been regularized and now he is seeking promotion to the post of Registrar Kanoongo.
9. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has made several representations to respondent No. 3 which are pending consideration.
10. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that his grievance will be substantially redressed in case all the aforesaid facts including his representation dated 05.07.2020 shall be considered and decided expeditiously.
6. Learned Chief Standing counsel does not dispute or object to the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner.
7. In light of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 05.07.2020 in accordance with law by reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
(Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 25.7.2022
Ravi/
