Allahabad High Court
WRIA/15321/2026 of SUKHRAM YADAV AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS on 23 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15321 of 2026 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioners who were working as Sub-Inspector in State
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15321 of 2026
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, 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 parties and perused the record.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioners who were working as Sub-Inspector in State Police, want an additional increment of pay on completion of 19 years of service in the light of judgment of this Court in the case of Ghanshyam Tiwari vs. State of U.P. & others passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 44330 of 2012 which was followed in the judgment of Virendra Kumar and another v. State of U.P. & 3 Others, Writ - A No. 48601 of 2015 against which Special Appeal (Defective) No. 538 of 2016 came to be dismissed on 07.09.2016 so also the Special Leave Petition (CC) No. 6316 of 2017 came to be dismissed on 03.04.2017.
3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits that this legal position has remained intact as on date and many such employees as petitioners have been accorded benefit. He has also placed before the Court recent order of this Court passed in the case of Radhe Shyam Yadav & 4 Others v. State of U.P. & 6 Others, Writ - A No. 6753 of 2023.
4. Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the aforesaid legal position.
5. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that each of the petitioners is required to move their individual representation along with the certified copy of this order and in the event representation is made, petitioners' claim shall be considered and disposed of in terms of the judgment of Ghanshyam Tiwari (supra) by passing appropriate orders within a period of six weeks of receipt of fresh representation. September 24, 2026 Rishabh Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Kumar Yadav, Santosh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Sukhram Yadav And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad