Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 192502 (ALL)

KAUSHLESH PRASAD AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/15396/2025 · 2025-10-13

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15396 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ved Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.K.Pal, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that they were working in Baghla Canal Division at Shankargarh, Prayagraj, however, now with respect to the duties which would be entrusted to the writ petitioner to perform the duties at Booth Level Officers at Legislative Assembly 262 Allahabad North, they have been assigned duties vide order dated 30.07.2025. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that there are certain problems which are beyond the control and comprehension thus their grievance be redressed by the respondents. 3. Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the to the fourth respondent to consider his claim. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the writ petitioner needs examination at the first instance by the fourth respondent. 5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same. 6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self- attested copy of the writ petition before the fourth respondent, Executive Engineer, Baghla Canal Division, Prayagraj who shall on the receipt of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ved Prakash Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kaushlesh Prasad And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) same by 31.10.2025, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. 7. Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off. October 14, 2025 A. Prajapati WRIA No. 15396 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad