SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 303

2004(3) Supreme 443
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Allahabad High Court)
Brijesh Kumar & Arun Kumar, JJ.
Mool Shankar Singh -Appellant
versus
Regional Manager, P.N.B. & Anr. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1591 of 2004
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4549/2003)
Decided on 12-3-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Mohan Pandey, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Dhruv Mehta, Mohit Choudhary, Mrs. Shalini Gupta, Advocates for M/s. K.L. Mehta & Co., Advocates.

Subject

Appeal - ALLOWANCE OF APPEAL

Act Referred

SERVICE LAW : .

Headnote

SERVICE LAW-Special Allowances-Claim for higher special allowances-High Court should have considered grievance of appellant on merits-Merely because in earlier writ petition the High Court had provided only for making representation-It would not mean that the matter is closed and petitioner was not entitled to approach the High Court, later even though representation was rejected and no relief was granted to him. (Para 2)

       

ORDER

Leave granted.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. In our view the High Court should have considered the grievance of the appellant on merits pertaining to his claim for higher special allowances. Merely because in the earlier writ petition the High Court had provided only for making representation, it would not mean that the matter is closed and the petitioner was not entitled to approach the High Court, later even though the representation was rejected and no relief was granted to him. The High Court never considered the case on merits.

3. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the High Court and remand the matter for consideration on merits.

Appeal allowed.

*****************

 

00023

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top