HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15449 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Gaurav Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was initially appointed as an Assistant Grade-II on 21.04.1975 in U.P. State Hortico Corporation, however, U.P. State Hortico Corporation stood disbanded and the employees were retrenched by the government Order dated 15.07.1990. Thereafter the first respondent, by virtue of the order dated 26.04.1991 took a policy decision on humanitarian ground to re-employee all the officers/ employees of the said U.P. State Horticultural Produce Marketing and Processing Corporation Limited. In light with the same, the writ petitioner was appointed as Gram Panchayat Adhikari on 18.06.1997 and was accorded joining on 28.06.1997 and was superannuated on 31.03.2013. As per the writ petitioner, similar benefits have also been accorded to the employees of Auto Tractors Limited, Pratapgarh, when it was disbanded and they were accorded employment in State Government. Various instances had also been mentioned. 3. Prayer in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner as per the entitlement. 4. Sri Gaurav Singh, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that the issues which have been sought to be raised by the writ petitioner needs examination at the first instance by the third respondent/ District Panchayat Raj Officer, District Hapur. He further submits that 5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has no Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Alok Kumar Yadav, Indra Narayan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mahendra Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) objection and he gracefully accepts the same. 6. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar, and bearing in mind relevant factors, that no final order has been passed, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with self attested copy of the writ petition and the certified copy of the order before Respondent no.3, who shall thereafter proceed to consider the claim of the writ petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter. In case any inputs are required from the writ petitioner, then a due communication be made to the writ petitioner so as to enable him to provide the same. October 15, 2025 N.S.Rathour WRIA No. 15449 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad