Court No. 24
Writ Petition No. 521 (SS) of 2010
Mohd. Sharif ... Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ... Opposite parties
-----------
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ
petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
Heard Mr. A. P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr. Anil Saran, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was engaged as Helper Wireman on 6.4.1991. He
asserts that the pick and choose method is being adopted in
engagement of Helper Wireman by the opposite parties. Large
number of similarly situated persons and juniors to the petitioners
have been engaged as Helper, but the same has been denied to
the petitioner. Being aggrieved, he moved a representation on
26.10.2009 before the opposite party No.2, which according to
him, is pending disposal.
After arguing the matter at length, learned counsel for the
petitioner says that he does not want to press the reliefs claimed
in the writ petition but restricts his prayer only to the extent that
the representation dated 26.10.2009 preferred by the petitioner,
contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, may be directed to
be decided, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.
In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of finally with
a direction to the opposite party No.2/Engineer-in-Chief, to
consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner,
contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, latest by 31.3.2010,
by means of a speaking and reasoned order, after affording
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Dt. 1.2.2010
lakshman/-