/10839/2024 of SUDHEER MAURYA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
Court: Allahabad High Court
Bench: ALOK MATHUR
Judgment date:
Case summary
Allahabad High Court judgment dated 2024-11-22. /10839/2024 of SUDHEER MAURYA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS....
Judgment text
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:77177 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10839 of 2024 Petitioner :- Sudheer Maurya Respondent :- State Of U. P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U. P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C. S. C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The grievances raised by the petitioner in the present case is with regard to none consideration of his candidature for appointment under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that grand father of the petitioner, Late Sri Ram Ratan Maurya was appointed as a Lekhpal in the Revenue Department and he died during his period of services on 30. 01. 2023 leaving behind the petitioner as his legal heir.
The father of the petitioner has predeceased his grand father and consequently in the aforesaid circumstances the petitioner has made appropriate application for appointment on compassionate grounds to respondent No. 3. 4. It has been submitted till date no orders have been passed on the said application and further submits that as per 12th Amendment of the Rules of 1974, grand-son has been included within the definition of family and therefore there is no legal impediment in consideration of the candidature of the petitioner on compassionate ground. 5. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent No. 3 shall be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in a time bound matter. 4. Learned Standing Counsel does not object if a direction is issued to respondent for expeditious disposal of the representation preferred by the petitioner. 5.
Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 23. 10. 2024 (Annexure No. 7) expeditiously, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him in accordance with law. (Alok Mathur, J. ) Order Date :- 22. 11. 2024 Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Source: Allahabad High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.