Anurag Pandey vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 33205 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Anurag Pandey vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. ... on 1 October, 2024

Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan

Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68089
 
Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8828 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Anurag Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kr. Misra,Satyarth Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Ajit Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Alok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel-II for the State.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

"(I) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing to the opposite parties to give appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds under the Dying-in-Harness Rules, in the interest of justice."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner is a son of the deceased employee and he has been given age relaxation pursuant to the judgment and order dated 23.03.2023 being passed by this Court in Writ-ANo.32334 of 2019; Anurag Pandey vs. State of U.P. & others. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to complete all the required formalities which have been completed by the petitioner. The petitioner has not been given any appropriate appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules till date. One list has been circulated, which has been annexed with the writ petition as Annexure No.7, wherein the name of the petitioner does not find place.

4. Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel-II has stated that she has received complete instructions in the matter and as per the aforesaid instructions the case of the petitioner is being considered for providing appropriate appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules and any appropriate order may be passed within a period of six weeks.

5. Be that as it may, if any appropriate decision would be taken in the case of the petitioner within a period of six weeks, therefore, I hereby dispose of this writ petition finally at the admission stage directing the Competent Authority to pass appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, within the aforesaid stipulated time and if the petitioner fulfills all the requisite formalities and there is no legal impediment, he may be given any suitable appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules within the aforesaid stipulated time.

6. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally.

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

Order Date :- 1.10.2024

Suresh/