HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13291 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri Ram Naresh Singh, along with Ms. Neeta Singh Chandel, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri Pankaj Patel, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 3, Shree Niwasa Bajpai, learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 and 5 and perused the material available on record. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed following relief:- i). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 1 to 3 that they consider the case of the petitioner and ensure the payment of retiral dues and pension along with arrears thereof and also ensure the payment of interest against he delayed payment to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. ii). issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to issue an order in the light of the order dated 19.08.2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 5623/1992 (SB) (Khushiram Vs. State of U.P. and others) and order dated 20.07.2018 passed by the Government in Special Appeal No. 284/2004 (Secretary Municipal Development and two others Vs. Khushiram) Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Neeta Singh Chandel, Ram Naresh Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sriniwas Bajpai Khushi Ram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Nagar Vikas Vibhag Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) please order the opposite party no. 1 to 5 to make payment of all post retiral benefits, pension, gratuity and other dues, contained as Annexure No. 3 & 4 to this writ petition. iii). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party no. 1 to 5 to make payment of all post retiral benefits, pension, gratuity and other dues along with 24% compoundable interest and all retiremental dues to the petitioner. 3. Opposing the petition Shri Pankaj Patel, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 3 submitted that the order dated 26.11.2021 passed by the Director, Local Bodies (Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition) was passed in the light of the order dated 09.08.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 16405 (S/S) of 2021 (Khushi Ram Vs. Director, Local Bodies Directorate, Indira Bhawan, Lucknow and others). He submitted that the Director, Local Bodies disposed of the representation of petitioner inter-alia holding that the petitioner does not belong to the Centralized Service. He contends that the said order dated 26.11.2021 has never been challenged by the petitioner. 4. Confronted with the aforesaid objection the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner intends to challenge the order dated 26.11.2021 before the appropriate forum and prayed that he does not want to press the instant petition, at this stage. 5. On the request of learned counsel for petitioner, the instant petition is consigned to record as not pressed. 6. Needless to say that it is open for the petitioner to challenge the order dated 26.11.2021 in the manner permissible under law. November 18, 2025 Virendra WRIA No. 13291 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench