Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 138073 (ALL)

MOHD. AMIR v. U.P. JAL NIGAM RURAL LKO THRU. MANAGING DIRECTOR AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/4889/2025 · 2025-05-05

Rajesh Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25748 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4889 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohd. Amir Respondent :- U.P. Jal Nigam Rural Lko Thru. Managing Director And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rishabh Kapoor Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Shri Rajesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for opposite parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- " (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite party No. 1 to consider the claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment on any suitable post according to his qualification under Dying-in Harness Rules, 1974 and pay prescribed salary. (ii) Issue writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite p arty No.1 to consider and decide the representation dated 23.04.2025 contained as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition." 3. At the very outset, Sri Rishabh Kapoor has submitted that in the present case, the competent authority would be Chief Engineer to took the decision, who has not been impleaded in the array of opposite parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that he may be permitted to implead the Chief Engineer with complete details as opposite party No.4 during the course of the day. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is ready to prefer a fresh representation to the Competent Authority, therefore, he may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.4 i.e. Chief Engineer (A-4) U.P. Jal Nigam (Rural), Lucknow and a direction may be issued to him to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner with expedition. 6. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection if direction for disposal of the said representation is issued. 7. Therefore, in view of the above, without entering into merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.4 i.e., Chief Engineer (A-4) U.P. Jal Nigam (Rural), Lucknow ventilating his grievance taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him enclosing therewith the copy of his earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 8. This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid terms. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench