Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46555 (ALL)

AJITABH PATHAK v. STATE OF U.P.AND 5 ORS.

WRIA/66129/2013 · 2025-07-15

Donadi Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114655 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 66129 of 2013 Petitioner :- Ajitabh Pathak Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 5 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- D.K.Singh,Hemant Kumar Singh,Man Bahadur Singh,V.K.Singh,Vijay Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Gautam Baghel,Haridwar Singh,Rakesh Kumar Soni,Tanmay Agarwal,Vivek Kumar Singh Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. The present writ petition is filed for the following relief:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 12/13.11.2013 passed by Upper Ziladhikari (Finance/ Revenue)- respondent No.5 (contained as Annexure -1 to the Writ Petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to make payment of salary to the petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs.6500-10500 in which the petitioner was earlier appointed and received salary throughout." 2. Subsequently vide order dated 09.05.2018 the present writ petition has been dismissed for want of prosecution. 3. In view of the same the interim order dated 04.12.2013 granted to the petitioner stood vacated. Consequent to the same the fifth- respondent has passed an order dated 26.05.2018 restraining the petitioner from performing his services. The petitioner has filed a recall application dated 29.05.2018. The said application was allowed and the writ petition was restored, but the petitioner has not challenged the order passed by the fifth- respondent dated 26.05.2018. Now by way of an amendment the petitioner has filed amendment application on 29.05.2024 after lapse of almost six years. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of fifth-respondent has taken an objection with regard to the amendment to the present writ petition as order passed by the fifth- respondent on 26.05.2018, is a fresh cause of action. Hence, the petitioner has to challenge the same by way of a separate writ petition. 5. Considering the submissions, the amendment application filed is rejected. It is needless to say that, it is left open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the fifth- respondent by way of fresh proceedings. 6. In view of the same, the present writ petition is also consigned to records. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 AdityaG (Donadi Ramesh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ADITYA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad