Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23603 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4358 of 2025 Petitioner :- Santosh Singh Rathore Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nager Vikas Anubhag 4 Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Misra,Sarvesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Patel, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:- "i. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned Order dated 21/02/2024 passed by the Opposite party No.-2 (Annexure no.-1). ii. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to regularize the service of petitioner from 26/08/2003 like similarly situated persons and accordingly ensure the payment of regular pension to the petitioner. iii. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to Count the ad-hoc services of petitioner from 07-03-1995 for qualifying service for the purpose of payment of pension and other retiral dues at par with similarly situated persons in accordance with Rule 21A of U.P. Palika (Centralized) Service (21st Amendment) Rules, 2003. iv. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the arrear of pension to the petitioner along with admissible rate of interest." 3. Attention has been drawn towards the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 passed by this Court in writ petition bearing Writ-A No.7384 of 2023; Suresh Kumar Sharma vs. State of U.P. & others, by submitting that the present writ petition is identical and similar to the issue which has been decided by this Court by means of the aforesaid judgment passed in the case in re: Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra). Therefore, the benefit of the aforesaid judgment may be extended to the present petitioner. 4. Sri Mishra, has further submitted that the aforesaid judgment has been complied with by the opposite parties and the PPO has been issued in favour of the petitioner. However, against the aforesaid judgment the special appeal bearing Special Appeal (Defective) No.275 of 2024 has been filed, which is pending consideration. Therefore, in the PPO it has been indicated that the benefit of order dated 08.01.2024 is provided subject to final outcome of the pending defective special appeal. 5. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the benefit of the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 may be provided to the present petitioner in the same manner the benefit has been provided to the identically placed employee Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra). 6. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 passed in the case in re: Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra) and while passing the order in favour of the petitioner, this much may be indicated that the benefit so given to the present petitioner would be subject to final outcome of the Special Appeal (Defective) No.275 of 2024. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 24.4.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench