Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119757 Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10018 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shashi Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Samarath Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- Avneesh Tripathi,C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "i. a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 27.2.2024 and 27.2.2024 (Annexure nos. 1 & 2 of the writ petition) passed by the respondent no.3. ii. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to forthwith consider the case of the petitioners and grant them promotion from their respective dates of applications." 2. Sri H. P. Sahi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that the sole ground taken for non-suiting the claim of the petitioners while passing the impugned order/orders dated 27.02.2024 is to the effect that the petitioners were more than 45 years of age on 29.12.2023. It is further submitted that the date 29.12.2023 was the date for consideration of age limit. It is further submitted that petitioner are qualified candidates for the post of Class-III in the University. It is further submitted that petitioners are qualified candidates and only reasons for non-suiting their claims is that they are overage for more than one year. It is further submitted that University or State may consider their candidature for the post of class-III category. It has also brought into the notice of the Court that University has already written a letter dated 09.06.2025 to the State-Authority for information on the similar points that whether any such type of age limit is required for the promotion of Class-IV employee of the University to the post of Class-III category. 3. Per contra, Sri Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3 in advance accepted notice has no objection on the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners during arguments and he has admitted that University has written a letter to the State Authority concerned for information whether such type of age limits are required for promotion of candidates from the post of Class-IV to Class-III but he has not received any reply of the said letter yet by the State. 4. Sri Jitendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondent submitted that if any such letter has been received by the competent authority, the same may be decided or reply may be given to the University at the earliest. 5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that matter may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.1 to take a decision on the letter sent by the Registrar of University at the earliest. 6. Heard Sri H. P. Sahi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jitendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1, Sri Avneesh tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3 and perused the contents made in the petition. 7. Taking into consideration the submissions made by respective counsels appearing on behalf of parties, I do not find any fruitful purpose to keep the matter pending. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the State-Authority to take decision on the letter dated 09.06.2025 sent by the University, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from today. 8. The reply given by the State-authority to the letter dated 09.06.2025 sent by the University, shall be binding on the University. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 AKT (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad