Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5812 (ALL)

NEHA SINGH AND 90 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS

WRIA/14013/2026 · 2026-09-07

Manju Rani Chauhan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14013 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsels for the respective BSAs and learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents, and perused the record. 2. The petitioners, who are 91 in number, have preferred the present petition with the following prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the communication dated 18.11.2025 issued by the Finance Controller, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Prayagraj, and the order dated 21.11.2025 issued by the Director of Education (Basic), UP, Lucknow. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to refix the salary of the petitioners by according 1st increment as on 01.01.2017 and to re-fix the salary thereafter within the period to be specified by this Hon'ble Court. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to disburse the petitioners their regular monthly salary every month as re-fixed in accordance with the preceding paragraph (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondent to compute the entire arrears of salary arising in favour of the petitioners on account of such re-fixation and to disburse the same within a period to be specified by this Hon'ble court along with interest so specified by this Hon'ble court." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, C.S.C., Shivendra Kumar Singh, Shivendra Singh Bhadauria Neha Singh And 90 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. The issue in question has already been decided by this Court in a bunch of petitions leading being Writ A No.481 of 2026 (Seema Ray and 3 Others vs. State of U.P. and 5 Others). 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the individual representations, if any, submitted by the petitioners, specifically indicating their respective dates of appointment, dates of joining, and the circumstances in which they could not join on the first day of the relevant month. Upon receipt of such representations, the competent authority shall examine the claim of each petitioner in the light of the statutory provisions, the applicable Government Orders and the observations made herein above, and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order, dealing with the individual claim of each petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. September 8, 2026 Rahul. WRIA No. 14013 of 2026 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad