Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 157493 (ALL)

VINAY KUMAR SHARMA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 5 OTHERS

/9098/2025 · 2025-08-13

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47230 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9098 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel for the opposite parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed with following main relief: "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No. 4 & 6 to carry out the fixation of salary of petitioner in terms of government order dated 26.08.1977 and G. O. dated 18.05.1983 contained as ANNEXURE No.3 & 4 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay difference of arrears of salary after fixation along with appropriate interest." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was initially working in Indian Army and subsequently he has been appointed in Police Department of the State of U.P., therefore, in view of the settled legal position, the services rendered by petitioner in Indian Army is to be counted for the purposes of fixation of his salary and other benefits. For the said grievances, he has made representation before the authority concerned but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Hence the present writ petition. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case set up on behalf of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of finally by providing that petitioner may file fresh representation ventilating all his grievances, supported by such documents, as he may be advised, before opposite party no.4, within two weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order. On such representation being made, opposite party no.4 shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned speaking order, preferably within three months thereafter, in case there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench