Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30225 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5625 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raghav Ram Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Pratap Singh,Ranjit Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Patel, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1 to 3. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party No.4 is hereby dispensed with. 3. By means of this petition, petitioner has prayed for following relief: "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned decision dated 31.08.2021 passed by the opposite party No. 3 contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the opposite parties to pay arrears of salary to the petitioner from 31.01.1988 to 21.11.1995 after deducting subsistence allowance paid to the petitioner, with an interest of 12% per annum. (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the opposite parties to pay arrears of salary to the petitioner from 22.11.1995 to 28.07.2000 with an interest of 12% per annum." 4. At the very outset, Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh has requested that he may be permitted to not press prayer No.1 at this stage and liberty may be given to challenge the aforesaid order at the appropriate stage. However, he has requested that for redressal of grievance of the petitioner so indicated in prayers No. 2 & 3, the liberty may be given to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to opposite party No.3 i.e. District Inspector of Schools, Pratapgarh and direction may be issued to him to take appropriate decision with expedition. 5. Therefore, considering the aforesaid request of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to delete the prayer No.1 of the writ petition during the course of the day. In respect of prayers No. 2 & 3, the liberty is given to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to opposite party No.3 i.e. District Inspector of Schools, Pratapgarh ventilating his grievance taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him enclosing therewith the copy of his earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other concerned, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 6. It is made clear that if the petitioner feels aggrieved from the impugned decision dated 31.08.2021, which has been not pressed at this stage, the same may be assailed at the appropriate stage, but strictly in accordance with law. 7. It is also made clear that I have not entered into merit of the issue, therefore, the DIOS may take appropriate decision independently without being influenced of any observation of this order. 8.This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid terms. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench