DEVENDRA KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/6623/2026 · 2026-05-04
Dinesh Pathak
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3300 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3300 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 6623 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:
" (a) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to release the retiral benefits such as due amount of gratuity of Rs. 20 lakhs as well as benefit of one increment after completing 19 years of service and second promotional pay scale after completing 24 years of service by revising pay scale forthwith to the petitioner along with interest, as the petitioner retired from the post of Dairy Supervisor in Aligarh Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Ramghat Road, Aligarh on 31.03.2025 within certain stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. It is submitted that the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.03.2025, while serving on the post of Dairy Supervisor. However, he has not been paid his gratuity and promotional pay scale, despite repeated requests, and representations submitted, on his behalf. It is further submitted that the Milk Commissioner (respondent no. 2) is the competent authority to decide the grievance/representation of the present petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel representing the State–respondent nos. 1 to 3, and learned counsel representing respondent nos. 4 and 5 do not dispute the submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard and they have no objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of a fresh representation, to be moved by the present 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vikram Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ganesh Datt Mishra Devendra Kumar Shukla .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
keeping this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioner to move a fresh representation before the Milk Commissioner (respondent no.
2) to ventilate his grievances, as raised in this petition, within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self attested copy of the instant writ petition, who, in turn, shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of five months from the date of production of the same, if there is no any other legal impediment. 6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of. May 5, 2026 vkg WRIA No. 6623 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad