Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 131657 (ALL)

CHHABBAN AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/3571/2025 · 2025-04-11

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20763 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3571 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chhabban And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health And Family Welfare Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Desh Deepak Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioners through this petition has prayed for the following relief:- "1. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to restore the services of the Petitioner on the post of Chowkidar. 2. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay the Petitioner his outstanding honorarium with interest till the date of payment. 3. Issue writ or command in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to consider and decide the requisition dated 10.03.2022 (Annexure no.2) and subsequent letter dated 20.03.2025 (Annexure no.4) to reinstate the petitioner into service in the interest of justice. 4. Any such other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem, just fit and proper may also be passed in favor of the Petitioners in the interest of justice." 3. Learned standing counsel, on the basis of the written instructions, has submitted that although the petitioners were working as daily wager on the post of Chowkidar at the new Community Health Center of Nagar Panchayat- Subeha, however, it is denied that they were working at Community Health Center. It is also submitted that entire payment of the petitioners have been paid, however, from perusal of the instructions it is not clear that as to for what period the petitioners have served before the opposite parties and how much payment has been given to them. The instructions are vague. 4. At this sage, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the opposite party no.2 may be directed to take a decision on their representation. 5. In view of the above, without entering into merit of the case, the petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation to opposite party no.2 within a period of two weeks'. The opposite party no.2 shall decide the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a further period of four weeks. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench