Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1550 (ALL)

SMT. ARTI SONKAR AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

SPLA/938/2025 · 2026-04-01

Saumitra Dayal Singh, Swarupama Chaturvedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 938 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J. 1. Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Dubey learned counsel for the private respondent-appellant, Sri Ankit Gaur learned Standing Counsel for the State, Sri Jai Shankar Pandey learned counsel for the original petitioner- respondent and Sri Vaibhav Tripathi learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 2. Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the record, we find no occasion to interfere with the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by learned single judge in Shivam Sonkar and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2025:AHC:152838, to the extent, it is the claim of the private respondent-appellant that the original petitioner-respondent is the second wife of the deceased employee Kripa Shankar. In that fact situation, the Succession proceedings are pending. Therefore, the directions issued by the learned single judge in paragraph-33 of the impugned order, is not correct. However, no challenge has been pressed to the direction to decide the claim for compassionate appointment. 3. As to the specific objection being pressed in this appeal with respect to payment of terminal dues to the private respondents, in face of nomination existing in favour of the private respondent in the service records of the said Kripa Shankar and in absence of any Succession Certificate issued in favour of the present appellant, the direction issued by the learned single judge for payment of the terminal dues to the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Ojha, Mahesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Jai Shankar Pandey, Raj Mohan Saggi, Vaibhav Tripathi Smt. Arti Sonkar And Another .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) nominee also call for no interference. 4. Needless to add, any payment made shall abide by the outcome of the succession proceedings that are already pending between the parties. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. April 2, 2026 Faraz SPLA No. 938 of 2025 2 (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad