Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Rajendra Prasad vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 October, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 40
Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 2 of 2018 IN Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 811 of 2018 Appellant :- Rajendra Prasad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Manta Ram Gupta,Neetu Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Ras Bihari Pradhan Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Shri Manta Ram Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner and perused the affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application.
Cause shown is sufficient. The delay is, accordingly, condoned and the appeal shall be treated to be within time.
Office shall give a regular number to this appeal. The delay condonation application is allowed.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Puspendra
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Court No. - 40
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 811 of 2018 Appellant :- Rajendra Prasad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Manta Ram Gupta,Neetu Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Ras Bihari Pradhan
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
This is an intra-court appeal against the judgement of a learned Single Judge.
Heard Shri M.R. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant- petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and Shri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 6.
Having heard Shri M.R. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant, at length, we find no justification for accepting the argument that the proposal of the Committee of Management as executed by the Manager for suspending the appellant, required the approval of the general body. The management of the body is empowered to execute its administrative responsibilities as enshrined under rules and consequently the argument that with regard to suspension approval is required from the general body running the institution, is a misconceived argument. We do not find any valid justification to entertain this appeal.
The special appeal is dismissed.
In the event, the appellant cooperates in the enquiry, the same shall be concluded, as early as possible, preferably, within a period of three months.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Puspendra
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

Rajendra Prasad vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 October, 2018
Judges
  • Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
Advocates
  • Manta Ram Gupta Neetu Gupta