Bramha Swarup Saxena vs State of U.P.and Others

Amitava Lala, J.—The case of the petitioner is that the respondent No.4 was given promotion before the petitioner because of no laches or fault on the part of the petitioner but the laches on the part of the respondent authority regarding the completion of record. Subsequently when the record was completed, the respondent No.4 was already given the promotion. No further promotion was given even when the respondent No.4 was further given promotion. In such a situation a peculiar situation arose and the petitioner invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for the remedy as during such period no State Administrative Tribunal was there but due to Ordinance, the petition could not be placed before the Tribunal and against the inaction on the part of the Government side. However, in respect of the promotion, nothing has been argued by the respondent authority and we found there is no case on the support.

Under such circumstances, we are not hesitant in passing any order in disposing the writ petition and directing the authority to give promotional benefits to the petitioner considering the period for which his promotion could not be given for the laches of the respondent till the date of his retirement.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

No order is passed as to costs.