Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12298 (ALL)

RAVINDRA SHANKAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/16443/2026 · 2026-10-06

Dinesh Pathak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 16443 of 2026 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing State-respondents and perused the record on board. 2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following relief: "A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no.3 to pay all retiral benefits i.e. E.P.F, Gratuity and Leave Encashment as well as unpaid salary of thirty seven months and amount of staff security with interest to the petitioner without any further delay." 3. Sri Ved Byas Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 3 to 5 and learned Standing Counsel representing State-respondents No. 1 and 2 have contended that the grievance of the present petitioner raised in the instant writ petition can be more appropriately redressed by the Managing Director (respondent No. 3), and they have no objection, in case, a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of a fresh representation to be moved by the petitioner within such stipulated period as may be directed by this Court. 4. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the Managing Director (respondent No. 3), to ventilate his grievance, as averred in the present writ petition, within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self attested copy of the present writ petition, and, in turn, he shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of production of such representation. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ved Byas Mishra Ravindra Shankar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of. October 7, 2026 vinay WRIA No. 16443 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad