HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14014 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Ms. Shruti Sahu, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4 and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R.S. Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State, Ms. Shruti Sahu, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4 and perused the record. Instant petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties mainly opposite party no.2 and 3 to deiced the case of the petitioner for appointment under Dying-In-Harness Rule and payment of Death cume Post Retiral Dues of the husband of the petitioner along with admissible interest in the interest of justice. ii) A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties mainly opposite party no.2 and 3 to consider and decide the representation which is contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. iii) Any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem, fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioners. iv) Allow the writ petition with costs." The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the wife of deceased employee, who died on 16.03.2024 during his service period. He submitted that the petitioner has claimed for appointment under Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rayees Ahmad Khan, Sateesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Namit Sharma Asha Kumari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Urban Dev. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) the Dying in Harness Rules 1974, but the same has still not been considered. After arguing at length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the interest of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to give liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2 and he may be directed to consider & decide the same, within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court. Learned counsel for the opposite parties have no objection to the contention aforesaid. Be that as it may, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is permitted to move a fresh representation or to fill up the requisite application/form, within period of 15 days, and if such formalities are completed within aforesaid period, the respondent no. 2/Nagar Ayukta, Nagar Nigam, Lucknow, is hereby directed to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks, in accordance with law, from the date, a certified copy of this order is produced before him. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition is disposed of. December 4, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 14014 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench