Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 87682 (ALL)

RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV AND 16 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/12105/2025 · 2025-08-21

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144459 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12105 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajendra Singh Yadav And 16 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Narayan Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Abhishek Srivastava,Adarsh Bhushan,C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Om Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for petitioners and S/Sri Abhishek Srivastava and Adarsh Bhushan, learned advocates for respondents. 2. Petitioners are harping on a lost battle. It is not disputed that petitioners were appointed in the month of September, 2000 and thereafter i.e. after U.P. State Electricity Board was merged with U.P. Power Corporation Limited, a company registered under Companies Act on which pension scheme would not be applicable and petitioners were governed by CPF Rules, 2004, therefore, there is no illegality that recent notification dated 28.06.2024 is not applicable in the case of petitioners. 3. An argument of learned counsel for petitioners is that since date of advertisement was of the year 1998, however, they were appointed in September, 2000, therefore, their date of entry in service should be deemed from the date of advertisement, however, learned advocates for respondents has rightly submitted that aforesaid argument has no legal basis since it is settled that any employee will be deemed to be entered in service of employer only when he gets appointed. The period of process is pending does not have any legal effect so far as date of appointment is concerned. It is also pointed out that after such a long period of 25 years, said argument may not be considered. 4. In view of above, Court finds that there is no reason to interfere with clarification given in the impugned order that Government Order dated 28.06.2024 would not be applicable to petitioners as well as above referred argument of learned counsel for petitioners raised after about 25 years would also not be acceptable. 5. Accordingly, this Court does not find any ground to consider prayer of petitioners, therefore, writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 N. Sinha Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad