DR. KAUSER USMAN SIDDIQUE v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. THE PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF MEDICAL EDUCATION LKO AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/6041/2024 · 2025-02-12
Abdul Moin
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 151522 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 151522 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9115 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6041 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dr. Kauser Usman Siddique Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Medical Education Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Aftab Ahmad,Noor Alam Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shubham Tripathi Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Syed Aftab Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 and Sri Shubham Tripathi,
learned counsel for respondents no.2 to 4.
2. Under challenge is the order dated 20.04.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, whereby the application of the petitioner for voluntary retirement has been rejected.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the appointing authority of the petitioner is the Executive Council while the application for voluntary retirement that had been submitted by him has been rejected by the Registrar of the University after taking approval of the Vice Chancellor which thus vitiates the order impugned.
4. Sri Shubham Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent University, also states that as the appointing authority of the petitioner is the Executive Council as such the decision should have been taken by the Executive Council itself.
5. Sri Bhasin also points out that various other doctors working in the University have been granted voluntary retirement by the Executive Council itself which is also indicative of the fact that it is the Executive Council which is to take a decision in the matter of voluntary retirement of the doctors. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the orders which have been filed cumulatively as Annexure- 7 to the petition.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 20.04.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, is quashed. Let a decision be taken on the application of the petitioner for voluntary retirement by the competent authority which is said to be the Executive Council.
7. Let such a decision be taken in accordance with law and relevant rules within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 12.2.2025 A. Katiyar Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench