HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 7036 of 2022 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sabhajit Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner had been retired prior to the issuance of the Government Order dated 12.12.2023, therefore, he is covered with the ratio of the judgment rendered in the case of Ram Ji Pandey versus State Of U.P. and 5 Others passed in Writ A No. 2202 of 2024 decided vide order dated 24.04.2024, wherein, the ratio of the judgment and order dated 21.04.2024 passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 976 of 2023, has also been considered. He submits that the petitioner is also entitled for the same relief. Learned counsel for the State do not dispute the aforesaid contentions. Upon considering the submissions of the counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the petitioner had been retired prior to the issuance of Government Order dated 12.12.2023 and the ratio of the aforesaid judgment in Ram Ji Pandey(Supra) case has been dealt with on the issue that those who have been retired prior 12.12.2023, would not be covered as the same has prospective effect. The present petitioner is also entitled for the same relief. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Radhe Shyam Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education, Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Consequently, the impugned order dated 16.03.2021 is hereby quashed. Resultantly, the writ petition is hereby disposed of in-terms of the ratio of judgment rendered in the case of Ram Ji Pandey(supra). November 20, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 7036 of 2022 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench