AKHILESH KUMAR MISRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Junior Census Clerk under the opposite party No.2. After completion of census work, he was retrenched from the post of Junior Clerk. Being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner filed a writ petition which was disposed of with a direction to the opposite parties to decide the pending representation of the petitioner, in light of the judgment and order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3126 (SS) of 2001. Petitioner's counsel further submitted that several junior persons, namely, Manoj Kumar, Uday Shanker and Vimlesh Kumar, who were similarly situated persons, have been given appointment on 4.3.2002. Since then, the petitioner is moving representations before the opposite parties, but no action has been taken by them. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the interest of justice would suffice, if the District Magistrate, Kheri is directed to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner (Annexure No.11). The Standing Counsel has no objection to this prayer. Accordingly, the opposite party no.2 is directed to consider the representation preferred by the petitioner, copy whereof has been annexed with the writ petition, and pass appropriate orders, after giving an audience to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.