Allahabad High Court
WRIA/12059/2026 of SHUKDEV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS on 8 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 12059 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
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 12059 of 2026
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
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 reliefs: "(a) issue, a writ, order or direction in nature of mandamus Commanding the respondents to pay arears of post retiral benefits and pension from the date they become payable along with interest, and to pay pension month to month to the petitioner.
(b) issue, a writ, order or direction in nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to decide the representation of petitioner regarding payment of post retiral benefits."
3. Sri Vinay Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Suresh Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 2 & 3; learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1, 4 and 5, have contended that the grievance of the present petitioner raised in the instant writ petition can be more appropriately redressed by the Executive Officer (respondent No. 3), and that 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. Accordingly, 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 Executive Officer (respondent No. 3), ventilating 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Parmeshwar Yadav, Satyam Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Suresh Chandra Dwivedi Shukdev .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
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.
5. With the aforesaid directions and observations, present writ petition stands disposed of. October 9, 2026 vinay WRIA No. 12059 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad