KALOO RAM GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3-U.P.Public Service Commission and have perused the record. Learned counsel for the respondents state that they have received instructions. As such, with consent of the learned of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that his case for promotion on the post of Additional District Development Officer (Social Welfare) was considered by the U.P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) but the result was kept in a sealed covered on account of some enquiry pending against him. The petitioner states that since the enquiry has been completed long back in which the petitioner has been exonerated, the sealed cover ought to be opened and in case if the recommendation for promotion of the petitioner has been made by the Commission, the State-respondents be directed to promote the petitioner.

(3.) On having received instructions the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents has categorically stated that vide communication dated 6.4.2011 made by the State to the Commission, the Commission was required to open the sealed cover and communicate the result of the petitioner to the State Government. However, despite the aforesaid communication, the same has not been done.