Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 17 To July 23, 2023

NOMINAL INDEX Dr. S.C. Asthana vs. State Of U.P. Through Principal Secy. Medi.And Hel. And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 217 XYZ vs. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Home Affairs New Delhi And Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 218 Neelam Devi vs. State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Co-Operative Lko And Ors 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 219 Ram Vilas vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Ors 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 220 Randeep Singh Surjewala vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 221 M/S Jai Prakash Associates Ltd vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 222 Ashish Kakkar vs. UOI 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 223 Shweta Punj vs. Union of India and 4 others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 224 Manorama Kuchhal And Another vs. Brijesh Narain Singh D.M./Collector NIC Dist. Centre And 6 Ors 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 225 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK Burden To Prove Employee's 'Wilful' Absence From Service Is On Disciplinary Authority: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Dr. S.C. Asthana vs. State Of U.P. Through Principal Secy. Medi.And Hel. And Another [Writ A No. 2000264 of 2000] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 217 The Allahabad High Court has held that in departmental proceedings, burden to prove that the unauthorized absence was 'wilful' is on the disciplinary authority. In absence of such finding, unauthorized absence does not amount to misconduct. The observation was made by a bench of Justice Irshad Ali while hearing the plea moved by a Medical Officer facing disciplinary proceeding for the charge of unlawful absence from duties during his foreign assignment period at Nigeria. CRPF | Denying Employment/Promotion To HIV-Positive Person Is Violative Of Articles 14, 16 And 21: Allahabad High Court Case title - XYZ vs. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Home Affairs New Delhi And Others [SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 430 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 218 In a significant verdict, the Allahabad High Court has held that a person, who is otherwise fit, could not be denied employment only on the ground that he or she is HIV positive and this principle also extends to grant of promotion. "In any case, a person’s HIV status cannot be a ground for denial of promotion in employment as it would be discriminatory and would violate the principles laid down in Articles 14 (right to equality), 16 (right to non-discrimination in state employment) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution of India," the bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Om Prakash Shukla observed. Daughters Can Apply For Compassionate Appointment Irrespective Of Their Marital Status: Allahabad High Court On Co-op Society Regulations Case Title: Neelam Devi vs. State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Co-Operative Lko And Ors [Writ A No. 18566 of 2021] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 219 The Allahabad High Court struck down the word ‘unmarried’ occurring before ‘daughter’ in the note appended to Regulation 104 of U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees' Service Regulations, 1975 which governs eligibility for compassionate appointment. A bench comprising Justices Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Om Prakash Shukla observed that the State has recognised the right of daughters irrespective of their marital status while amending the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. The same recognition should be granted to daughters under the 1975 Regulations. Mere Pendency Of Criminal Case No Ground To Cancel Arms License In Absence Of Clear Finding Of Threat To Public Peace: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Ram Vilas vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Ors [Writ C No. 1562 of 2020] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 220 The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that the pendency of criminal cases cannot be the sole ground for cancellation of a firearm license in the absence of a specific recording by a competent authority that possession of the same would be dangerous to public peace, safety and security. Relying on the decision of a coordinate bench in Ram Prasad v. Commissioner and others, Justice Manju Rani Chauhan held, “it is undoubtedly to say that merely pendency of the criminal case or with the apprehension that the petitioner may be involved in future in any other criminal case cannot be a ground for cancellation of the arms license under the Arms Act, 1959, unless and until a clear cut finding is recorded by the Competent Authorities that the possession of the fire arms caused threatening of the public peace and is danger for the safety of human being. The Competent Authorities fail to record any such finding in the impugned orders.” Samvasini Case: Allahabad HC Stays Coercive Action Against Randeep Surjewala Till Disposal Of His Plea For Legible Documents U/s 207 CrPC Case title - Randeep Singh Surjewala vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23896 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 221 ...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 17 To July 23, 2023

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags