HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14644 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. Heard Sri Amit Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gaurav Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner seeks benefit of promotion under the old pension scheme as according to him, while he was initially appointed as a work-charge establishment in the year 1998 under the circular letter dated 15th October, 1997 but ultimately the services could be regularized in the year 2006. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that during the interregnum period the old pension scheme was scrapped w.e.f. 1st April, 2005 and it is for the delay at the end of the respondent that the petitioner stands denied for the benefit of old pension scheme. It is submitted that petitioner cannot be held liable for the delay caused at the end of the respondents and hence petitioner would be entitled to benefit of old pension scheme. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.- 607 of 2024 (State of U.P. and others v. Chandra Mohan Yadav, Retired Junior Engineer Civil Nagar Nigam, Prayagraj) and other connected matters decided on 6th May, 2025. He has placed paragraph 23 and 24 of the judgment which is reproduced hereunder: "23. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are, therefore, of the considered view that claim of all the writ petitioners for regularisation was required to be considered pursuant to Rule 21-A(1) introduced on 10.04.2003. Any delay occasioned by the State in consideration of their claim for regularisation cannot be a ground to deny benefit of pension to the writ petitioners. On 10.04.2003, Old Pension Scheme was applicable. Entitlement of respondents/writ petitioners for regularisation is also undisputed. Following the reasoning adopted by the coordinate Division Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Triloki Nath Nishad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Benches in the aforesaid two matters which have attained finality with dismissal of Special Leave Petitions and Review Petitions, we are inclined to hold that all the writ petitioners would be entitled to the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme treating their date of entry into service as 10.4.2003. The appellant-State shall calculate the pension of the respondents/writ petitioners treating their substantive appointment to have been made on 10.4.2003. 24. The direction issued by the learned Single Judge for granting pension from 1995, however, cannot be sustained and stands modified accordingly. The pensionery benefits in terms of above determination would be extended to all the writ petitioners within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order. Some of the persons who are already getting pensions would be entitled to re- determination of their pension in terms of the above direction. However, no recovery would be made from them." Learned Standing Counsel submits that petitioner may raise his plea before the concerned respondent, namely respondent No.- 4, who may decide the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period which may be prescribed by this Court. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation along with certified copy of this order before the respondent No.- 4 within four weeks from today and in the event he makes representation as directed herein above, the same shall be disposed in accordance with law and also considering the authorities referred to herein above in this order, within a further period of two months. September 25, 2025 Atmesh WRIA No. 14644 of 2025 2 (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad