Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Surendra Nath Gupta vs State Of U.P.Throu Its Secy. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 August, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that although vide order dated 07.9.2006, Annexure-3, writ filed by the petitioner was allowed and the respondents were allowed to pay salary to the petitioner for the period specified in the order, with a further direction that the period of absence shall be treated as continuous service of the petitioner for seniority, promotion, increment and retiral dues, yet the needful has not been done. The petitioner retired on 30.6.2008.
Sri Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate has put in appearance for respondent nos.2 and 3 and prays for time to file counter affidavit.
List after six weeks.
Counter affidavit be filed within three weeks from today.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within two weeks thereof.
Respondent no.1 shall be represented by the State.
Order Date :- 31.8.2012 A.Nigam
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

Surendra Nath Gupta vs State Of U.P.Throu Its Secy. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 August, 2012
Judges
  • Ajai Lamba