Sachin Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Kailash Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent no.1, and Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for respondents no.2,3 and 4.
2. The petitioner, through this writ petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 either to take appropriate and necessary decision on the reference made by respondent no.3 by letter dated 27.12.2011 followed by reminder dated 30.04.2013 and 04.03.2021 for providing compassionate appointment or to refer the matter to the State Government f through proper channel forthwith.
(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
(iv) Award the costs of the petition in favour of the petitioner.“
3. The case of the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner Late Satya Pal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.