STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. FINANCE DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER v. SHYAM SINGH AND ANOTHER
WRIA/5354/2023 · 2025-01-20
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 151391 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 151391 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3439-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5354 of 2023 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Lko. And Another Respondent :- Shyam Singh And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Sameer Singh,Manish Mishra,Yogesh Kumar Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. Heard Shri Indrajeet Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioners-State and Shri Shyam Singh, respondent no.1, who has put in appearance in person. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State at the very outset has stated that the benefit of the
judgment rendered by the Tribunal on 07.02.2023 has already been accorded to the respondent No.1 while considering his candidature for promotion based on merit-cum-seniority. However, his merit was not found above benchmark or higher than the candidates considered along with him. On the basis of such assessment, the other persons considered for promotion along with respondent no.1 have already been promoted. The
order so passed by the State has come to be challenged by the respondent no.1 by filing a separate writ petition which is pending. Shri Indrajeet Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has further submitted that once the benefit of the
judgment passed by the Tribunal has been extended to him, the questions raised in the Writ Petition have been left of academic significance only, which should be left open for being considered in appropriate proceedings.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the rights which have crystallized in the present proceedings are accordingly confirmed leaving the legal question as to the authority of Commissioner of Devi Patan Mandal to record Annual Confidential Remarks (ACRs) in an appropriate case if the question so arises. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of. It is clarified that we have not opined anything in so far as the determination of merit of the respondent no.1 in D.P.C. giving rise to the fresh litigation is concerned. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)(Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.)
Order Date :- 20.1.2025 akhilesh/- Digitally signed by :- AKHILESHWAR KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench