Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel.
In view of the proposed order, requirement of issuance of respondent no.5 is hereby dispensed with.
The petitioner by filing this writ petition has challenged the appointment of respondent no.5-Satya Prakash Shukla as Conciliation Officer under the provisions of the U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and the Rules framed thereunder.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the procedure for appointment as Conciliation Officer under the provisions of the aforesaid Act and the Rules is given in Rule 4 of U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014, according to which the Maintenance Tribunal (Sub Divisional Officer) is required to prepare a panel for appointment as Conciliation Officer and from the said panel the appointment is to be made by the State Government. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that from the information furnished under the Right to Information Act by the Public Relation Officer vide his letter dated 29.12.2020, which has been annexed as annexure-3 to the writ petition, it emerges that petitioner's name was recommended by the Sub Divisional Officer, who functions as Maintenance Tribunal under the Act for appointment as Conciliation Officer, whereas name of respondent no.5-Satya Prakash Shukla was not recommended for appointment as Conciliation Officer by the Sub Divisional Officer. He thus submits that since Rule 4 mandates that appointment by the State Government as Conciliation Officer can be made only from amongst those who are included in the panel for appointment to be prepared by the Maintenance Tribunal (Sub Divisional Officer), the appointment of respondent no.5-Satya Prakash Shukla runs contrary to the aforesaid provisions contained in Rule 4 of the Rules, 2014.
Having regard to the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, we permit the petitioner to make an application/representation, taking all the pleas and other pleas which may be available to him under law and annexing therewith all the documents on which the petitioner intends to rely, to the State Government within a week ten days. In case any such application/representation under this order is furnished by the petitioner along with certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered by the State Government strictly in accordance with law i.e. U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and the Rules made thereunder. The decision under this order on the application/representation to be preferred by the petitioner shall be taken by the State Government within two months.
We further provide that while taking decision under this order on the application/representation to be preferred by the petitioner, the State Government shall also provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the respondent no.5-Satya Prakash Shukla as well.
The decision which may be taken by the State Government shall be communicated to the parties.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 akhilesh/