Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 63361 (ALL)

DHARMAVEER SHARMA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/7785/2025 · 2025-07-02

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103146 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7785 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharmaveer Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Adarsh Bhushan,C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Gopal Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Petitioner retired from service on 30.8.2022. 3. Petitioner was granted 1st ACP in terms of G.O. dated 5.11.2014 on 1.12.2008 and thereafter he was granted 2nd ACP on 1.7.2017 after the effect of punishment awarded earlier was over. 4. Aforesaid orders were never challenged by the petitioner that the 1st and 2nd ACP ought to have been granted earlier, during his service period. 5. It is not under dispute that 3rd ACP can be granted only after 10 years of grant of 2nd ACP, but before that the petitioner has retired. 6. Now the petitioner has come up with a case that he may be granted 3rd ACP, even after retirement considering the earlier two ACP's granted at later stage. However, as referred above, petitioner has never challenged the grant of earlier two ACP's w.e.f. from earlier date. 7. Impugned order was passed on representation filed by the petitioner on basis of an order passed in the earlier round of litigation. However, it was rejected that services of the petitioner was not satisfactory since he has suffered various punishments as well as requirement of 10 years service for grant of 3rd ACP was not fulfilled. 8. Argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner has no legal basis since there is a legal impediment that petitioner has never challenged the date of grant of earlier two ACP's and since the requirement of 10 years service for grant of 3rd ACP was not fulfilled as well as admittedly during service period, the petitioner has suffered punishment on more than two occasions, therefore, petitioner's service was not satisfactory, therefore, Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the impugned order. 9. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 SB Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad