Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 860 (ALL)

WAKIL SINGH KUSHWAHA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

WRIA/5522/2026 · 2026-04-19

Dinesh Pathak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 5522 of 2026 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing State-respondents and perused the record on Board. 2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs: " A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned respondents to reduce the restoration period of the commuted pension after expiry of 10 years 11 months or at best 11 years instead of 15 years as provided in the G.O. dated 23.7.1987, 6.12.1990 and 8.12.2008. B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directed the concerned respondent not to deduct the amount of commuted portion of pension the from the monthly pension of the petitioners after the expiration of 10 years 11 months or at best 11 years." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the commuted portion of pension has already been recovered within 10 years and 11 months; therefore, the petitioners are entitled to restoration of full pension. 4. Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State respondents has contended that the period for recovery of the commuted pension has now been extended up to 15 years. He has further contended that grievance of the petitioners can be more appropriately redressed by the Deputy Director Secondary Education (respondent no.5) and he has no objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the fresh representation, to be moved by the present Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Roy Sharma, Vishal Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Wakil Singh Kushwaha And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) petitioners, within such stipulated period, as may be directed by this Court. 5. 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 making any observation on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioners to move a fresh representation before the Deputy Director Secondary Education (respondent no.5) 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 four 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. April 20, 2026 vkg WRIA No. 5522 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad