SAHB DEEN AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. AGRICULTURE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/12950/2025 · 2025-11-07
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 179941 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 179941 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 12950 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned state counsel for opposite parties 1 and 2 and Mr. Satyanshu Ojha learned counsel for opposite parties 3 to 5. 2. Petition has been filed seeking following prayers:-
" i) Issue a writ, order and direction in the nature of mandamus to commanding the opposite parties to consider and make the payment of post retiral dues and pension under Old Pension Scheme" and paid the pension and other post retiral dues in accordance to the Old Pension Scheme to the Petitioners within time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court, with all consequential benefit. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to make the payment of post retiral dues and pension to the Petitioners as per judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prem Singh v. State of 11.P. and Others reported in 2019 (10) SCC 516 as well as Writ.-- A No. 8968 of 2022 decided on 17.02.2023 and Special appeal No-97 of 2021 (State of U.P. & 4 Others Versus Bhanu Pratap Sharma) which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 09.06.2021 within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that aforesaid issued has thereafter been considered and decided in writ petition No.731 of 2024, Jai Ram Sharma versus State of U.P. and others. 4. Since petitioner's grievances would require consideration of factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to make a fresh representation before opposite party No. 3 i.e. Vice Chancellor, Narendra Dev University of Agriculture & Technology, District Ayodhya. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided in the light of aforesaid judgments in case same are applicable, within a period of six Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hanumant Lal Yadav, Om Chauhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Prashant Kumar Singh Sahb Deen And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Agriculture Education And Research And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority. 5. The petition stands disposed of.
November 7, 2025 prabhat WRIA No. 12950 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench