Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195483 (ALL)

RAM NIWAS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/11700/2025 · 2025-10-07

Shree Prakash Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11700 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the records. Instant writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs :- "i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties, more specifically the opposite party no. 1 to look into the matter as to why the petitioner is being treating as a fresh appointee with effect from the year 2005 and has been deprived from his old pension, and ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties, more specifically the opposite party no. 2 to took into account the entire period of service rendered by the petitioner with effect from the year 1989, treating the petitioner in regular service with effect from the year 1989, not as a fresh appointee of the year 2005, and iii)issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties to make payment of salary and entire service benefits admissible to the petitioner for the period from 01.09.2001 to 06.06.2005." After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 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 while raising all his claims before the authority concerned and the authority concerned may be directed to decide the same within a stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this court. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid. Be that as it may and without entering into the merits of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to move a fresh representation raising his all claims, before the opposite party no. 3 within a period of 15 days from today, and if such representation is moved, the opposite party no. 3 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ganga Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Niwas .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) is directed to consider and decide the same within further period of two months. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition is disposed of. October 7, 2025 AKS WRIA No. 11700 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench