Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 125829 (ALL)

MUKESH SINGH AND 43 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. COOPERATIVE DEPTT. LKO. AND 22 OTHERS

WRIA/2372/2025 · 2025-02-27

Abdul Moin

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11769 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2372 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mukesh Singh And 43 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative Deptt. Lko. And 22 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nirankar Singh,Sheo Narain Rao Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gaurav Mehrotra Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Akber Ahmad, Advocate, on behalf of respondents no. 3 to 23 is taken on record. 2. At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is permitted to correct the names of petitioners No.2 and 38 in the array of the parties during the course of the day. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-State No.1 and 2 and Shri Akber Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.3 to 23. 4. There is consensus at Bar that the the matter in issue is squarely covered by the order dated 06.12.2024 passed in Writ A No.7820 of 2024 In re Kamal Krishna Mishra vs State of U.P. & 3 Ors, a copy of which is Annexure-8 to the petition. It is further contended that a special appeal filed against the said judgment vide Special Appeal No.09 of 2025 In Re U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd Lucknow & 2 Ors vs Kamal Krishna Mishra & Anr has been dismissed in limine vide judgment and order dated 10.01.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-9 to the petition. Thus, the judgment of this Court in the case of Kamal Krishna Mishra (supra) has attained finality. 5. Considering the aforesaid consensus, the writ petition is allowed. It is provided that the petitioners are also entitled to the benefit of the judgment in the case of Kamal Krishna Mishra (supra) and the order impugned dated 02.07.2024 is quashed in so far as it pertains to the petitioners. 6. At this stage, learned counsels for the parties point out that the petitioner No.1 has not been paid salary for the months of August, September, November, December, 2024 and January, 2025; petitioners No.2 to 5 have not been paid salary for the months of September, November, December, 2024 and January, 2025; the petitioners No.6 to 33 & 42 have not been paid salary for the months of November, December, 2024 and January, 2025; the petitioners No.34 to 41 have not been paid salary for the months of December, 2024 and January, 2025; and the petitioners No.43 and 44 have not been paid salary for the month of January, 2025. 7. In view thereof, the respondents are directed to pay salary to the petitioners for the aforesaid months without any deduction and continue to pay salary month to month in accordance with law under relevant rules, provided there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 prateek Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench