MAHAVEER SINGH v. U.P. JAL NIGAM (RURAL) THRU. MANAGING DIRECTOR LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIA/11439/2025 · 2025-09-24
Abdul Moin
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167194 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167194 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11439 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anindya Shashtri,
learned counsel, who files Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is being decided finally.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite he having retired on 31.07.2020 his entire retiral dues have still not been paid and hence the prayer for payment of the said dues alongwith admissible interest.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before respondent no.2 which may be directed to be decided within a time frame fixed by this Court to which learned counsel appearing for respondents has no objection.
5. In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before respondent no.2 then respondent no.2 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of submission of the representation along with certified copy of this
order.
6. It is also provided that in case any dues are found due to the petitioner Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Savita Jain Counsel for Respondent(s) : Samir Om Mahaveer Singh .....Petitioner(s) U.P. Jal Nigam (Rural) Thru. Managing Director Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
the same would also be released within next four weeks from the date the representation of the petitioner is decided provided there is no legal impediment.
7. While making the payment of dues the respondents would also consider for payment of interest on the delayed payment of the retiral dues.
8. With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed off.
9. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. September 24, 2025 A. Katiyar WRIA No. 11439 of 2025 2 (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench