Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 95857 (ALL)

SMT. KIRAN DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/13983/2025 · 2025-09-16

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 13983 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. Heard Ms. Jigyasa Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.K. Asthana, learned counsel for respondents. 2. Petitioner is guilty of her own act. Admittedly, she has not challenged termination order dated 20.09.2001. Even when probably on same set of evidence, criminal prosecution was dropped since final report was accepted and revision thereof was dismissed. 3. An opportunity was available with the petitioner when she was granted fresh appointment. Even at that moment, petitioner has never objected his fresh appointment and she continued in service for further 6 years and she got retired in 2024. Thereafter, admittedly, she has taken benefit of retiral dues and now she has approached this Court, still she has not challenged the order dated 20.09.2001 and to object fresh appointment at present state could not serve her purpose since if the order dated 09.10.2018 whereby she was granted fresh appointment is set aside, she has to return the salary paid as well as other benefits also. 4. At this stage, when learned counsel for petitioner was confronted with aforesaid facts and legal impediment, she prays that this writ petition may be disposed of with an observation that in case retiral dues of petitioner are still not paid and petitioner is able to make out her case on basis of record, the respondents may pay the same in accordance with law. 5. Learned counsel for respondents submits that although all benefits have been granted, still, any legally permissible dues is not paid, on the basis of petitioner’s representation, it will be considered and paid in accordance with law. 6. Considering aforesaid submissions, relief sought in present writ Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jigyasa Singh, Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Kumar Asthana Smt. Kiran Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) petition cannot be granted, however, with above observations and liberty, this writ petition is disposed of. September 17, 2025 N. Sinha WRIA No. 13983 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad