Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26503 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4954 of 2025 Petitioner :- Janardan Lal Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivam Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had earlier filed Writ-A No. 4725 of 2025, titled "Janardan Lal Mishra vs. State of U.P. and Others", which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 18.06.2024. In that order, the opposite parties were directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 06.05.2024. It was further directed that the said representation be decided strictly in accordance with the same manner as was done in similar cases of identically placed employees. The petitioner contends that the benefit in question has already been extended to similarly situated employees, as detailed in paragraphs 33 and 34 of the writ petition. The employees named—Ashok Kumar and Balak Ram—have been granted the benefit of relaxation from an earlier date, despite being admittedly junior to the petitioner. Attention of the Court has been invited towards Annexure No. 13, which indicates that Balak Ram was appointed as a Seasonal Nikasi Munshi vide order dated 07.02.1992, and Ashok Kumar was appointed to the post of Nikasi Munshi on 11.06.1994. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argues that the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 18.06.2024 were not considered while passing the impugned order, which is annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. The impugned order makes no mention of the similarly situated employees, namely Ashok Kumar and Balak Ram, regarding whom specific directions had been issued by the Court. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the petition, however, he could not show from the impugned order that the authorities have complied with or considered the directions issued by this Court Perused the record. The operative part of the order dated 18.06.2024 is extracted below:- "Considering the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner so also the similar order annexed with the writ petition passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court, contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench Lucknow to decide the execution case no.449 of 2023 expeditiously say within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order." From perusal of the impugned order (Annexure No. 1), it is evident that while deciding the petitioner’s representation, the directions issued by the Court have been completely ignored. The impugned order does not reflect that it has been passed in accordance with the judgment and order dated 18.06.2024. In view of the above, the impugned order is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to respondent no. 3 to pass a fresh order strictly in compliance with the judgment and order dated 18.06.2024 passed in Writ-A No. 4725 of 2025, "Janardan Lal Mishra vs. State of U.P. and Others," within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench