Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 187653 (ALL)

PUNEET KUMAR BHARDWAJ v. THE STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

WRIA/14745/2025 · 2025-09-24

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14745 of 2025 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking for the following relief:- "a. Issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents, to grant the Second Promotional Pay Scale/Grade Pay of Programmer Grade-1, Rs.5400/- (Pay Band-3, Rs. 15,600/-39,100/-) on account of completion of 16 years of services, and also to grant the Increments & Benefits of 7th Pay Commission (Revised Pay Scale) along with arrears, in view of the Relevant Government Orders dated 18/06/2015, 20/12/2016, 22/12/2016 & 13/04/2020, with all 4 SEP 202 consequential benefits. b. Issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus, Commanding the Respondent Authorities, to consider the claim of the Petitioner and to pass appropriate order within stipulated time, with Regard to granting Second Promotional Pay Scale/Grade Pay of Programmer Grade-1, Rs.5400/- (Pay Band-3, Rs. 15,600/- - 39,100/-) on account of completion of 16 years of services, and also to grant the Increments & Benefits of 7th Pay Commission (Revised Pay Scale) along with arrears, in view of the Relevant Government Orders dated 18/06/2015, 20/12/2016, 22/12/2016 & 13/04/2020, with all consequential benefits." 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner without entering into the merits of the case made innocuous prayer that he may be permitted to file fresh representation before respondent no.6 and a direction may be issued to him to decide the same in time bound manner. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 6 vehemently opposed the petition on merit, but has not opposed the prayer as made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Girijesh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 5 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ambuj Maurya, Atipriya Gautam, Madhaw Pandey, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Grijesh Tiwari Puneet Kumar Bhardwaj .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) and 6 and Sri A. K. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel and perused the contents made in the writ petition. 5. Without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner as no objection made by learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation along with the present writ petition and certified copy of this order before respondent no.6 Registrar Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut within 20 days. After receiving the said representation, the respondent no.6 is directed to decide the said representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation. 6. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. September 25, 2025 AKT WRIA No. 14745 of 2025 2 (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad