Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 131967 (ALL)

ANKUR KASHYAP v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. ANIMAL HUSBANDRY LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/4008/2025 · 2025-04-25

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23924 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4008 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ankur Kashyap Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Animal Husbandry Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondent State. 2. The petitioner through this petition has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case for promotion on the post of Veterinary Pharmacist under the provisions of Government Order dated 14.12.2004. 3. Learned Standing counsel, on the basis of written instructions, which is taken on record, has submitted that the post of veterinary Pharmacist is filled up by way of 100 percent direct recruitment. There is no provision for filling up the post by way of promotion. . 4. Perused the record as well as the instructions provided by the learned Standing Counsel. 5. Perusal of the written instructions shows that vide the Government order dated 14-12-2004 (Annexure-1), provision was made for recruitment of 85% of the posts of Veterinary Pharmacist through direct recruitment and 15% through promotion. However, on the recommendation of Pay Committee 2008 it has been decided by the Finance Department that the posts of Pharmacist should be filled through 100% direct recruitment. It appears that government order dated 14.12.2004 has been superseded by the Government orders dated 1.2.2007, 8.9.2010 and 18.3.2011 and now in the Animal Husbandry Department all the post of Veterinary pharmacist are 100 per cent filled up by direct recruitment. The petitioner has not challenged the above-mentioned three government orders in this petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be given liberty to challenge the above mentioned three government orders by filing a fresh petition. 7. The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. However, it shall be open for the petitioner to file a fresh petition challenging the aforesaid government orders by which the earlier government order dated 14.12.2004 has been superseded and claiming for the relief prayed in this petition. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench