Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2186 (ALL)

SATYAVEER SHARMA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/6755/2026 · 2026-05-05

Dinesh Pathak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 6755 of 2026 Court No. - 33 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: "I. Issue a writ order nature of direction in the mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner dated 21.11.2025 with regard to the payment of salary and re- employment within a short stipulated time period as may be specified and directed by this Hon'ble Court." 3. It has been submitted that the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary and reinstatement in the service have not been decided till date, despite the repeated representation made by the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the Noida authority has contended that the grievance of the present petitioner can be more appropriately redressed by the Chief Executive Officer (respondent No. 2), and he has 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. 5. 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 considering the merits of the case, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before Chief Executive Officer (respondent No. 2), with respect to his grievances, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gaurav Tiwari, Km. Ashra, Tanveer Zafar Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushalendra Nath Singh Satyaveer Sharma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) as mentioned in the present writ petition, within a period of three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order and self attested copy of the present petition, who shall, either himself or through the authority competent, as permissible under the law, consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months thereafter. 6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of. May 6, 2026 vinay WRIA No. 6755 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad