Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
Jamuna Prasad Pandey vs State Of U P Thr.Prin.Secy.Home … on 29 January, 2010
Court No. - 24

Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 5132 of 2009

Petitioner :- Jamuna Prasad Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U P Thr.Prin.Secy.Home Govt.Of U P Civil
Sectt.Lko.
Petitioner Counsel :- Sanjay Kumar
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma,J.

On the basis of instructions and record, learned Standing Counsel
states that sealed cover procedure has been adopted on account of the
pendency of the criminal cases against the petitioner, to which learned
Counsel for the petitioner disputes and states that one criminal case is
pertaining to him and his neighbour and has nothing to do with the
service and service conditions of the petitioner. He further submits that it
does not amount to moral turpitude which attracts initiation of sealed
cover procedure. Next, he contended that the Government Order, which
has been relied, is also not applicable in the case of the petitioner,
insofar as in the said Government Order, it has been provided that in
case the criminal case is pending for more than one year, the promotion
cannot be kept in abeyance for all times to come.

Let counter-affidavit be filed within three weeks, to which rejoinder
affidavit may be filed within one week, thereafter.

List immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.

As the petitioner is going to retire on attaining the age of superannuation
on 31.1.2010, it is provided that in case the petitioner succeeds in the
writ petition, the post-retiral dues and arrears on the promotional post
shall be paid to the petitioner.

Order Date :- 29.1.2010
lakshman


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.100 seconds.