Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 56 of 2025 Appellant :- Vijay Bahadur Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Gaytri Rajput,Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. (Order on Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.Nil of 2025) This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a delay of four days and reasons given in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application are sufficient. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal. Office is directed to assign a regular number to this appeal. (Order on Appeal) Heard Sri Harishankar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he had also appeared before this writ court on 11.12.2024 when the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the appellant had himself given an undertaking before the authorities that in case, incorrect pay fixation results in excess payment being given to him, the same may be recovered. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that similarly situated administrative officers of the Irrigation Department in Writ A No.2010/2018 (Mohan Lal Sharma & Anr. Vs. Engineer In Chief Irrigation Department, Government of U.P. and Ors.) which was allowed on 19.9.2018 and on 17.9.2021 the respondent Executive Engineer of Saprar Prakhand, Jhansi complied the order of the writ court. Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on interim order dated 19.7.2023 passed in the Case of Surendra Singh in Writ A No.10897 of 2023, where the writ court while entertaining the writ petition had directed the Executive Engineer to file his personal affidavit as to under what circumstances, the case of the appellant was distinguishable from the case of Arvind Kumar Tiwari, who had been given the benefit of order passed in Writ A No.13080/2022. The court had directed that the entire dues of the petitioner, Surendra Singh be cleared in similar faction as has been done in the case of Arvind Kumar Tiwari, the said writ petition No.10897 of 2023 is pending, however, his writ petition has been dismissed. This Court has put a specific query to Sri Harishanker, counsel for the appellant as to whether he had argued before the writ court regarding pendency of similar writ petition wherein interim order was granted and also regarding disposal of writ petition filed by similarly situated petitioners where the order of the writ court was complied with, he says that he had argued the matter and the court has not noticed it in its order. Since, the counsel for the appellant has stated that his argument regarding case of similarly situated persons given the benefit has not been considered at all in the judgment impugned in this petition, we cannot on this ground alone entertain the Special Appeal. The remedy for the appellant is to approach the Hon'ble Single Judge concerned by way of filing review application with affidavit indicating that such argument although was made by counsel was not noticed in the order. Special Appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Gaurav Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad