SHYAM BIHARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. URBAN DDEVELOPMENT DEPTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/14697/2025 · 2025-12-18
Shree Prakash Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 203452 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 203452 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14697 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pankaj Shukla, advocate, holding brief Mr. Sampoorna Nand Shukla, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 & 4, Mr. G.K. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. Instant petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
" 1- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 4 to add / count the service period i.e may 1988 to 25.01.2006 rendered by the petitioner as on daily wages prior to regularization of services and revise / fix the correct pension and other admissible consequential benefits to the petitioner after counting the aforesaid service period rendered by the petitioner as daily wages. 2-Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 4 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2025 contained as Annexure no.- 7 to this writ petition. 3- Issue any other order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4-To allow the writ petition with cost" After arguing at length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 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 before the respondent no. 2 and he may be directed to consider & decide the same, within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anup Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sampurna Nand Shukla Shyam Bihari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Ddevelopment Deptt. Lko And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
Learned counsel for the opposite parties have no objection to the contention aforesaid. Be that as it may, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is permitted to move a fresh representation within period of 15 days, and if such representation is moved within aforesaid period, the respondent no.
4/Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parisad, Belha, District- Pratapgarh, is hereby directed to consider and decide the same, within further period of six weeks, in accordance with law, from the date, a certified copy of this order is produced before him. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition is disposed of. December 18, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 14697 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench