Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 102295 (ALL)

SUSHIL KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/14944/2025 · 2025-10-12

Vikas Budhwar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14944 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Dayanand Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that though the writ petitioner was appointed as a clerk in the office of District Magistrate, Amroha on 23.10.1996 and he was promoted in the year 2019 as Senior Assistant and superannuated on 31.07.2024 but he has not been paid the amount referable to GPF etc. along with dearness allowance. 3. Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents to accord the said benefits.. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the writ petitioner needs examine at the instance by the District Magistrate, Amroha. 5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same. 6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self- attested copy of the writ petition before the second respondent, District Magistrate-Amroha, who shall on the receipt of the same by 04.11.2025, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. In case the fourth respondent is of the opinion that the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dayanand Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sushil Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) matter is to be decided by some other authorities then the papers shall be transmitted to the same. 7. Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off. October 13, 2025 A. Prajapati WRIA No. 14944 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad