Allahabad High Court
Surjan Singh vs State Of Up And 6 Others on 13 March, 2024
Author: Prakash Padia
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:44625 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3409 of 2024 Petitioner :- Surjan Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ambuj Maurya,Atipriya Gautam,Shyam Sharan Shrivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Harsh Kumar Alok, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer:-
"(i) issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Authorities, to promote the petitioner from the post of Inspector to Dy.S.P., in accordance with the provision of Rule 5 (ii) & 16 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Service Rules - 2016, from the date similarly situated persons & Juniors to the petitioner have been granted promotion, with all consequential benefit, in view of the Law Laid-down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of R.K. Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 126 & Amar Kant Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar AIR 1984 SC 531,
(ii) issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Authorities, to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Dy.S.P., in accordance with the provision of Rule 5 (ii) & 16 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Service Rules - 2016, from the date similarly situated persons & Juniors to the petitioner have been granted promotion, with all consequential benefit, in view of the Law Laid- down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of R.K. Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 126 & Amar Kant Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar AIR 1984 SC 531"
3. It is stated by learned Standing Counsel that in case petitioner will approach the concerned competent authority the authority concerned will take a decision in the matter.
4. In response to the same, it is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has already approached the authorities namely Secretary, Home (Police), Anubhag-1, U.P. Govt. Secretariat, Lucknow and Director General of Police, U.P. DGP Headquarters, Lucnkonw by submitting representation dated 03.12.2023 (paper book page no.116 to 122) and reminder dated 29.01.2024 (annexure 13 to the petition) though a considerable time has already lapsed but till date no decision has been taken on the same.
5. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
6. Taking into consideration the nature of relief sought by the petitioner and without dwelling upon the merit of the matter, the petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.2-Secretary, Home (Police), Anubhag-1, U.P. Govt. Secretariat, Lucknow to take a decision on the representation preferred by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
7. Since the writ petition has been decided on an exparte version without seeking any response from the respondents, thus the passing of the order today may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the matter and the second respondent shall accord independent consideration strictly in accordance with law and the mandate of law holding the field.
Order Date :- 13.3.2024 Pramod Tripathi