NAKCHHED AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/7402/2025 · 2025-07-10
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150519 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150519 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39273 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7402 of 2025 Petitioner :- Nakchhed And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Shanker,Rakesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1.Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State counsel for opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authority for providing post retiral benefits alongwith arrears with regard to services rendered by petitioner's father late Ram Pal since 02.02.2001. Interest on arrears has also been sought.
3. Mr. Manish Pratap Singh, learned State Counsel has refuted the prayer so made in the petition as adverted to annexure-6 of the writ petition to submit that petitioner's late father had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 737 (SS) of 2009 seeking service benefits from the date of initial appointment. The said petition was disposed of for decision on representation, which was thereafter rejected by means of order dated 31.07.2009, which was never challenged and therefore, submits that petitioner is not entitled for benefits as sought.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute the fact that
order dated 31.07.2009 passed earlier rejecting claim of petitioner's late father was never challenged.
5. In view of admitted facts as indicated hereinabove, it being evident that representation preferred by petitioner's late father was rejected by means of order dated 31.07.2009, which was never challenged. The said representation having been made with regard to service benefits from date of initial appointment, would have a bearing in the present writ petition as well and due to aforesaid fact, relief as sought cannot be granted.
6. In view thereof, the petition fails and is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own cost.
Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench