NATHUNI SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PALOK Basu, J. The petitioner Nathuni Sharma prays through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitu tion of India that: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the records and quashing the impugned orders dated 1-3-1995, 10-1-1995 and 29-12-1994 (Annexures-IV and V), order dated 14th September, 1995 (An-nexure-IX) and the censure entry in service record of the petitioner as per order dated 29-9-95 (Annexure-X) respectively passed by the respondents. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respon dents to treat the petitioner as having been duly promoted/appointed on the next higher post of Assistant Engineer from the date when the im mediate Junior to the petitioner was promoted alongwith all consequential benefits including further promotions to all next higher post and the respondent may be also commended to refund forthwith the entire due ar rears/amounts with interest. (iii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) Award costs to this petition to the petitioner.

(2.) WHEN the writ petition was filed before a learned Single Judge Standing Counsel was granted two months to file counter affidavit but by the interim order dated 12-1-96 it was permitted that the petitioner's representation Annexure-6 shall be decided within one month. The said representation has been decided by the respondent's order dated 30-3-1996 a copy of which order has been filed as An- nexure-9 through the amendment applica tion which makes an additional prayer that the order dated 30-3-96 (Annexure-9) may also be quashed. No counter-affidavit has been filed in the writ petition and during the course of hearing opportunity was granted repeatedly to the State but neither any reply to the writ petition nor to the amendment application is forthcoming. As prayed by the learned Counsel for the parties the writ petition was consequently heard on merits and the judgment was reserved.

(3.) IN view of what has been stated above, the amendment application is al lowed and the relief and the two para graphs shall be deemed to have been in corporated in the original memorandum of the writ petition.