HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14759 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Saharsh Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the records. The present writ petition has been filed with following prayers:- "to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to regularize the service of petitioner from 26/08/2003 like similarly situated persons as per rule 21 A (iii) of The Uttar Pradesh Palika (Centralized) Services (Twenty First Amendment) Rule, 2003. ii. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to Count the ad-hoc services of petitioner from 07-03-1995 as qualifying service for the purpose of counting regular service at par with similarly situated persons. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to revise the service benefits of the petitioner as and when the same falls due; at the appropriate time in service. to, issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case. to, allow the writ petition with cost." The contention put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the services of the petitioner has been regularised with effect from 03.11.2015, whereas, he is entitled for regularisation since 26.08.2003, from which date Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sarvesh Kumar Saxena, Anand Awasthi, Manish Misra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Apoorv Pandey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Anubhag-4 And Another .....Respondent(s) the similarly situated employees have been regularised by giving the benefit of Rule 21A(iii) of U.P. Palika Centralised Services, 21st amendment Rule 2003(hereinafter referred to as 'Rule 2003'). He further submits that interest of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objections. In view of the aforesaid submissions of counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the services of the petitioner has been regularised since 03.11.2015, whereas, his claim is with respect to the regularisation with effect from 26.08.2003. The fact remains that certain other employees who approached this Court have also been granted the benefit of the same. One order has been passed in the case of Naresh Kumar in Writ A No.12603 of 2025. Consequently, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of, directing the respondent no. 2/Director, Local Bodies, Lucknow, to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for regularization in light of the judgment and order passed in Writ A No. 12603 of 2025 as well as the provision of rule 21A(iii) of the Rules 2003, within period of eight weeks, from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. It is clarified that if the claim is not raised or is not pending before the authority concerned, the petitioner shall raise the claim by way of moving a representation, within period of one week, before the authority concerned. December 18, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 14759 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench