Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42457 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3582 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar And Another Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar,Nitesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Nitesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioners, who are working currently as Sub Inspectors in Civil Police wants consideration of their claim for leave salary for the period they worked under training against the post of Sub Inspector as they had proceeded on leave while working as Constables to undergo the training. 3. It is contended that petitioner no. 1 Ashish Kumar was permitted leave to undergo training from 02.11.2015 to 28.02.2017 and then on 11.08.2017 to 28.08.2017 and likewise petitioner no. 2 Pankaj Bhaskar was allowed leave to undergo training from 02.11.2025 to 31.01.2017 and then 11.08.2017 to 28.08.2017. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that circular letter of department issued on 16.09.1965 provides for payment of leave salary as such for those within the Police Department, if they undergo training as Sub Inspector while working on the post of Constables. 5. It is contended that in connection with same, the position stood further clarified vide Government Order dated 03.11.1979, however, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in identical set of facts certain persons were not granted leave salary and hence they approached the Court by filing writ petition being Writ - A No. 17331 of 2019 which was dismissed on 15.11.2019, against which Special Appeal was preferred being Special Appeal No. 169 of 2020, Alok Kumar Singh & 5 Others v. State of U.P. &7 Others which came to be allowed vide detailed judgment and order dated 08.09.2021. The operative portion of the order is placed before the Court, which is quoted hereunder: "Accordingly, we set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and direct the respondents to extend the benefit, as envisaged in the Government Order of 1965 followed by circular of 1979 which otherwise has been allowed by the Apex Court in its judgment dated 28.08.2019. The petitioners case would be considered in the light of the Government Order of 1965 followed by the circular of 1979 without being guided by the subsequent clarified order dated 22.12.2015. The circular runs counter to the circular of the year 1979. Without its suppression, this cannot be applied. 6. Against the aforesaid order it is contended, that State had unsuccessfully filed Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 798 of 2022 which came to be dismissed on 04.02.2022. 7. In the circumstances, it is contended that petitioners' claim is liable to be considered in accordance with law laid down in above authorities and in this regard they have jointly made representation before the competent authority namely the respondent no. 2 on 21.09.2024 vide registered post. 8. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection in the event this concerned respondent is directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. 9. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that respondent no. 2 to look into and consider the grievance of the petitioners raised in their representation dated 21.09.2024 in the light of the authority cited before this Court and the observations of the Division Bench of this Court quoted herein above. Appropriate decision shall be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 10. Needless to add the order to be passed by the competent authority, as directed herein above, shall be reasoned and speaking one. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 IrfanUddin Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad