HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9037 of 2025 and WRIT - A No. - 893 of 2024 and WRIT - A No. - 7441 of 2024 and WRIT - A No. - 7461 of 2024 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey, Suyash Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey, Suyash Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey, Suyash Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Versus Gulam Nabi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Indra Nath Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Aditya Kumar Tripathi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Vinod Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko And 3 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Counter affidavit filed today by counsel for the State is taken on record. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. The question in all the connected petitions are identical, therefore, the bunch of the writ petitions is hereby decided collectively. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioners in all the connected petitions have been retired prior to the issuance of the Government Order dated 12.12.2023, therefore, they are 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 petitioners are 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 petitioners 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. Consequently, the impugned order dated 27.07.2024 in Writ A No. 7461 of 2024 and orders dated 02.08.2024 in Writ A No. 7441 of 2024 and also in Writ A No. 9037 of 2025 passed by Deputy Director of WRIA No. 9037 of 2025 2 Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey, Suyash Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Others .....Respondent(s) Education(Secondary) 9th Region, Ayodhya are hereby quashed. Resultantly, the writ petitions are hereby disposed of in-terms of the ratio of judgment rendered in the case of Ram Ji Pandey(supra). November 12, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 9037 of 2025 3 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench