Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 162508 (ALL)

STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. /PRIN. SECY. AYUSH U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS v. DR. KAMLA YADAV

SPLAD/369/2025 · 2025-09-10

Manjive Shukla, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 369 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. (C.M. Application No.1 of 2025) 2. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 3. Heard. 4. We have gone through the affidavit in support of the application seeking condonation of delay. Cause shown is sufficient. 5. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Delay is condoned. (Order on memo of appeal) 6. Heard. 7. The contention of the appellants' counsel is that private respondent attained the age of superannuation on 30.04.2020 and not 30.06.2020, however, he was given the benefit of extension of services till the end of the session i.e. 30.06.2020, accordingly, he continued till 30.06.2020. The question before the writ court was as to whether in this scenario, the benefit of annual increment which would accrue on 01.07.2020 would be available to such a person or not. However, as the writ petition was Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent(s) : Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Ayush U.P. Lko. And 2 Others .....Appellant(s) Dr. Kamla Yadav .....Respondent(s) decided on the first day itself without calling for a counter affidavit, therefore, this aspect could not be placed before the writ court and could not be considered by it. 8. On being confronted, Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the private respondent submitted that this issue, of course, has not been considered but even if it was considered, he was entitled to the benefit. 9. As this issue which was to be considered has not been considered, we set aside the impugned judgment. Consequently, the petition stands restored and shall be listed before the writ court on 13.10.2025 as a fresh case. In the meantime, the appellants herein shall file counter affidavit in the writ petition. The petition may be considered accordingly by the writ court. 10. Accordingly, the special appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. September 10, 2025 Shanu/- SPLAD No. 369 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench