Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14069-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 104 of 2025 Appellant :- Ram Niwas And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Agriculture Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Firoz Ahmad Khan,Abdul Alim Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Naresh Chandra Mehrotra Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. (I.A. No.1 of 2025-Delay) 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri N.C. Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 4. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents state that they have no objection to the delay condonation application. 3. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the special appeal is condoned. (Order on Special Appeal) 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri N.C. Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 4. 5. By means of this special appeal, the appellants have challenged the order dated 5.9.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No.7392 of 2024 (Ram Niwas and others vs. State of U.P. and others). 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that representation of the appellants may be directed to be considered and decided in accordance with law. 7. We have perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge in Para-3 has found as under: "3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 2 to 4 has raised a preliminary objection regarding entertainability of this petition in view of the fact that as per admitted case of petitioners themselves, the petitioners were earlier engaged by opposite parties on temporary basis and were thereafter dismissed from service in the year 1999. The termination order was thereafter adjudicated upon and was decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 16th December, 2005 in the case of State of U.P. versus Neeraj Awasthi and others, (2006) 1 SCC 667. It is submitted that in pursuance thereof, the petitioners' services were again terminated on 27th January, 2006 which has not been challenged by the petitioners." 8. In view thereof, the prayer of learned counsel for the appellants for issuing a directing for deciding the representation of appellants is refused. We do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 9. The special appeal is dismissed. . [Brij Raj Singh,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.] Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Sachin Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench