Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 165227 (ALL)

HARI KISHOR SHUKLA AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. FOREST AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/10954/2025 · 2025-09-17

Manish Mathur

Civil Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 10954 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs: "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to consider and provide the revised/upgraded/amended pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.01.1996 along with interest @ 18%, with all consequential service benefits including arrears of the differences of salary etc. pursuant to Govt. order dated 24.10.2009 and 23.04.2025 issued in compliance of judgment & orders dated 21.08.2008 &03.02.2010passed in writ petitions bearing no.5902 (S/S) of 2005 and writ petition no.2974 (S/S) of 2007 respectively, filed by similarly situated employees/incumbents of the state government's department (Contained as Annexure No.-08, 10, 07 & 09), also in view of recent judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lt. Col. Suprita Chandel Vs Union of India- Civil Appeal No.1943 of 2022 decided on 09.12.2024. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to re-determine/re-fix pension of the petitioners (who are retire now) after providing the revised/upgraded/amended pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/- to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.01.1996 instead of 06.11.2003. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kr. Yadav Warsi, Arjun Singh Yadav, Rama Nand Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Hari Kishor Shukla And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Forest And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to take decision upon the pending representation of the petitioners in light of judgment and order datd 21.8.2008 and 3.2.2010 passed in Writ Petition NO. 5902 (S/S) of 2005 and writ petition no. 2974 (S/S) of 2007 respectively." 3. Since consideration of petitioners' grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioners to submit their fresh individual representation before the opposite party no. 2-Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow or any other competent authority, who shall consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of eight weeks in the light of judgements indicated in the prayer as the same is applicable. 4. With the aforesaid observations/directions, petition stands disposed of. (Manish Mathur,J.) September 17, 2025 AKK WRIA No. 10954 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench