Anil Kumar Arya Vs. State and Others

Anil Kumar Arya vs State and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Uttaranchal Decided Sep 07, 2010

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/919484

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/919484
Court: Uttaranchal High Court
Judge: B.S.Verma, J.
Decided On: Sep 07, 2010
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 1191 of 2009 (S/S)
Subject: Service

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service

Key legal issue: Service
Acts & sections: Dying and Harness Rules, 1974,

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anil Kumar Arya

Respondent

State and Others

Legal References

Acts: Dying and Harness Rules, 1974,

Excerpt

1. heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. by means of this petition, the petitioner have sought following reliefs:- “1. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under the dying and harness rules for appointment on class-iii post. 2. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of ad interim mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 18.02.2009. 3. issue a writ, order or direction which this hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 4. award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioners.” brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner are that father of petitioner died on 08.09.2008. after death of his father, petitioner applied for appointment under dying and harness rules, 1974, for class iii post on 25.09.2008. the application, moved by the petitioner is within time. on 03.11.2009, respondent no. 2 referred the matter to the state government for necessary directions. in para-9 of the writ petition, it has been stated that the appointing authority of the petitioner was director general, medical health and family welfare, dehradun (respondent no. 2) and as such, there was no occasion for the said authority to refer the matter to the state government. since the application is within time, the respondent no. 2, who is appointing authority has to take decision on the application of the petitioner for appointment under dying and harness rules, 1974. therefore, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no. 2 to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with dying and harness rules, 1974 within a period of 8 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By means of this petition, the petitioner have sought following reliefs:-

“1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under the Dying and Harness Rules for appointment on Class-III post.

2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of ad interim mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 18.02.2009.

3. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

4. Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioners.”

Brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner are that father of petitioner died on 08.09.2008. After death of his father, petitioner applied for appointment under Dying and Harness Rules, 1974, for Class III post on 25.09.2008. The application, moved by the petitioner is within time. On 03.11.2009, respondent No. 2 referred the matter to the State Government for necessary directions.

In para-9 of the writ petition, it has been stated that the appointing authority of the petitioner was Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Dehradun (respondent No. 2) and as such, there was no occasion for the said authority to refer the matter to the State Government.

Since the application is within time, the respondent No. 2, who is appointing authority has to take decision on the application of the petitioner for appointment under Dying and Harness Rules, 1974.

Therefore, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No. 2 to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with Dying and Harness Rules, 1974 within a period of 8 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Same Court & Year Uttaranchal · 2010 Same Parties Anil Kumar Arya vs State and Others Same Subject Service Same Judge B.S.Verma, J. Acts & Sections Dying and Harness Rules, 1974,