RAM SAHAY AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. BASIC EDUCATION LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
WRIA/4183/2025 · 2025-04-18
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134776 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134776 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22142 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4183 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Sahay And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Upendra Prakash Pathak,Navneet Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ravi Prakash Yadav,Uday Veer Singh Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Sri Upendra Prakash Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Brajendra Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-opposite parties no.1 & 2, Sri Ravi Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for opposite parties no.3 & 4 and Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned counsel for opposite parties no.5 & 6. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have prayed following main reliefs:-
"i. A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay arrear of General Provident Fund / dues of the petitioner for the period mentioned in para-4 of writ petition along with 18% interest forthwith. ii. A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to decide the representation dated 06.11.2024 preferred by the petitioners as contained in Annexure No.6 to this writ petition."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that for redressal of the aforesaid grievance, the petitioners have preferred representation to the competent authority, but to no avail. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the petitioners may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation before opposite party no.4 and this Court may direct opposite party no.4 to pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsels for the opposite parties have no objection if direction for disposal of the representation is issued. 5. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, the petitioners are permitted to prefer a fresh and exhaustive representation to opposite party no.4 i.e. Finance and Accounts
Officer, Basik Shiksha, Ayodhya 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 petitioners within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation of the petitioners 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 petitioners forthwith. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 18.4.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench