Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Managing Director, U.P. State ... vs Thru Uttar Pradesh Commission For ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|08 January, 2010

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Satyam Maurya appears for respondent no. 1. Issue notice to respondent no. 2. Steps in a week.
The Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd.-the petitioner in this Writ Petition is aggrieved by the directions issued by the Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commission, requring him to decide the matter of promotion of Shri Jitendra Ram, Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer in accordance with the law.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 11 of the Uttar Pradesh Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1995 the Commission can investigate, monitor all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the Constitution or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the State Government and to evaluate the working of the safeguards. The Commission is also empowered to enquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The recommendations made by the Commission have to be laid before the houses of State Legislature along with a memorandum explaining the action taken or proposed to be taken on the recommendations. He would submit that the Commission does not have power to issue any direction or to adjudicate the service matters or other disputes brought before it. The Commission has not been vested with the powers akin to Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue any directions to be complied with by the State authorities.
We find it appropriate to direct the Chairman of the U.P. Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to file an affidavit to show cause as to under what authority he has passed the impugned order. The counter affidavit will be filed in three weeks. The petitioner will have one week thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List immediately thereafter.
Until further orders, the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 22.12.2009 shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 8.1.2010 RKP
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Managing Director, U.P. State ... vs Thru Uttar Pradesh Commission For ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
08 January, 2010