Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 132635 (ALL)

SHYAM PRAKASH TRIPATHI v. INTERNATIONAL RAMAYAN AND VEDIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE THRU. PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/3817/2025 · 2025-04-11

Rajesh Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20764 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3817 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shyam Prakash Tripathi Respondent :- International Ramayan And Vedic Research Institute Thru. President/Director And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kaustubh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1.Sri Anurag Tyagi, learned counsel has filed his Vaklatnama on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 and 4, which is taken on record 2. Heard Sri K.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Brajendra Singh learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-opposite parties no. 2 and 3 and Sri Anurag Tyagi, who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 and 4. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed following main reliefs:- "(i) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to release the total amount of leave encashment on account of about 300 leave to his credit the payment of Rs.5,47,500/- and the amount of Gratuity Rs. 9,03,375/- which is total stands to be paid to the petitioner by the opposite party institute comes to Rs. 14,50,875/- along with the 18% of interest; (ii). the entire pensionary benefits and the arrear of the same as admissible to the petitioner in accordance with the pension scheme applicable on the state government employee." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for redressal of the aforesaid grievance, the petitioner has preferred representation to the competent authority, but to no avail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation before opposite party no.1 and this Court may direct opposite party no.1 to pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has no objection if direction for disposal of the representation is issued. 5. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, the petitioner is permitted to prefer a fresh representation to opposite party no.1 i.e. the President/ Director, International Ramayan and Vedic Research Institute, Ayodhya U.P. taking all pleas and grounds, which are necessary for disposal of the representation and also enclosing the earlier representation, if any, alongwith certified copy of this order within a period of fifteen days from today. If such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation of the petitioner by speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, with expedition, say within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of the representation and thereafter communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner forthwith. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Order Date :- 11.4.2025 dk/ Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench