Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 119227 (ALL)

VINAYAK DWIVEDI AND 10 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. P.W.D. DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/1073/2025 · 2025-01-28

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5614 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1073 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vinayak Dwivedi And 10 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. P.W.D. Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay,Vireandra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition is for a direction to respondents to consider the services of the petitioners to be regularized from the date of their initial appointee rather than the date of which actual regularisation order was passed. 3. It has been submitted that all the petitioners are working on the various Class-IV posts in P.W.D. Department for a long period of time and they all have been regularised by orders passed between 2019 to 2022 and they have superannuated after rendering 25 to 28 years of service but pension has not been paid to them because they have not completed qualifying services on regular post. 4. In this regard, it has been submitted that petitioner has given a representation dated 17.12.2024 to the respondent which is pending consideration and has not been decided so far. 5. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent No. 4 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure No. 1) in a time bound manner. 6. Learned Standing Counsel does not object if a direction is issued to respondent for expeditious disposal of the representation preferred by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 4 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure No. 1) expeditiously, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him in accordance with law. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 28.1.2025 Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench