Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40325 (ALL)

SMT. MACHHALA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/12504/2023 · 2025-09-11

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 12504 of 2023 Along with Writ-A No.-14902/2021, 15083/2021 15095/2021, 15988/2021, 16021/2021, 16418/2021, 18392/2021, 19344/2021, 1466/2022, 1718/2022, 3153/2022, 3782/2022, 4601/2022, 4720/2022, 8487/2022, 8700/2022, 9293/2022, 16503/2021 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. Heard Sri V.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for petitioner in Writ-A No.15083 of 2021, S/Sri Semant Singh, Yatindra Singh, Amit Dubey, learned counsels for petitioners in other writ petitions and Sri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted S/Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, Suresh Singh and Vimlesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for respondents and S/Sri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, Harshit Pandey, Munna Pandey, Harsh Vardhan Gupta, Nilamber Tripathi and Shyam Mani Shukla, learned counsel for respondents in other writ petitions. 2. During pendency of these writ petitions, petitioners who have already been adjusted in different local bodies and are satisfied that they are getting regular salary. The only grievance, which still left is that, if the petitioners have worked with respondent Jal Nigam before their adjustment in other local bodies and their salary was not paid in accordance with law, the same may be paid. 3. Sri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Counsel for respondents fairly submits that in case, petitioners are able to show that they have worked in the respondent department Jal Nigam and their salary applicable was not Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sarvesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : Harshit Pandey, Sanjay Kumar Om Smt. Machhala .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) paid, the respondent- Jal Nigam will pay the salary. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of with an observation that petitioners will not claim repatriation to their parent department i.e. Jal Nigam, however, their claim for salary if they have worked with respondent - Jal Nigam, will be considered by concerned respondent after due verification in accordance with law as well as in a chronological manner and their claim will be settled expeditiously within period of three months and it will be the duty of petitioners to place all records about their respective place of work and duration thereof within a period of 3 months so that their claim be considered thereafter preferably within period of three months. September 12, 2025 P. Pandey WRIA No. 12504 of 2023 2 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad