STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF LABOUR GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS v. SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH
SPLAD/103/2025 · 2025-03-06
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 126271 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 126271 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13686-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 103 of 2025 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Labour Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Respondent :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Appellant :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Kripa Shankar Shukla Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. (I.A. No.1 of 2025-Delay Condonation Application)
1. Heard.
2. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the special appeal.
3. No objection has been filed against this application.
4. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application is sufficient.
5. Accordingly, the application is allowed and delay in filing the special appeal is condoned. (Order on Appeal)
1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, Advocate on behalf of the sole respondent is taken on record.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The order impugned herein this intra-Court Appeal filed under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 has already been acted upon to the extent of deciding the representation filed by the sole respondent regarding which permission was granted to him in the impugned order.
4. Once the representation permitted to be made has been decided by the Competent Authority against which a fresh writ petition has came to be filed by him, thus, assailing the order which has already been complied with by the State serves no purpose.
5. The intra-Court appeal having lost its efficacy is consigned to record leaving all the legal questions open in the pending
writ petition arising out of the order passed by the State.
6. It is also to be noted that the contract of employment has since been brought to an end which question is also open to be adjudicated upon in the fresh writ petition filed by the respondent. Therefore, once the services have been terminated, compliance of the order to the extent of payment of minimum of pay-scale also does not servive in the present appeal. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) (A. R. Masoodi,J.) Order Date :- 6.3.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench