NANDU RAM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. RURAL ENGINEERING DEPTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/6767/2025 · 2025-07-01
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144925 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144925 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36911 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6767 of 2025 Petitioner :- Nandu Ram And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Srivastava,Shambhoo Sharan Lal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following main relief:- i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing opposite parties to grant all post-retiral dues to petitioners such as pension, commutation of pension, gratuity, leave encashment, group insurance scheme etc. along with arrears of pension with effect from date of superannuation, counting their past services rendered as work charge employees in work charge establishment prior to regularisation of their services in the regular establishment with all consequential benefits. ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing opposite parties to consider and decide representation submitted by petitioners pertaining to counting of their past services rendered as work-charge employees for pension and other post-retiral benefits.
3. It is submitted that petitioners have superannuated from service in year 2022 from department concerned after regularization of service but their services rendered earlier as work-charge employees have not been taken into account.
4. For redressal of grievance, petitioners have already submitted representation(s) but seek liberty to file a fresh representation before authority concerned.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners restricts prayer for decision on representation of petitioners.
6. Considering the innocuous prayer, without adverting to merits of the case, liberty is granted to petitioners to make fresh representation before opposite party no.2, i.e. Director and Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Department, U.P. Lucknow. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided by authority concerned expeditiously by a reasoned and speaking
order within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order along with fresh representation is produced before the said authority.
7. With aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.7.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench