Allahabad High Court
WRIA/7298/2026 of HEAD CONSTABLE SHAYAM AUTAR DIXIT Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 13 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 7298 of 2026 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State and perused the records. 2. The petitioner while working on the post of Head Constable superannuated from
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7298 of 2026
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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 for the respondent-State and perused the records.
2. The petitioner while working on the post of Head Constable superannuated from service on 31.05.2025 just before retirement of the petitioner an order dated 18.03.2025 was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Head Office, Commissionerate, District Kanpur Nagar/respondent no.3 by which salary of the petitioner was revised 01.01.2006.
3. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that before passing aforesaid order by which salary of the petitioner has been revised, no opportunity or notice has been given to the petitioner. It is further argued that salary has been paid to the petitioner without taking any undertaking and once it is found that no fraud or concealment has been done at any point of time there was no occasion for respondent no.3 to reduce the salary of the petitioner and that too retrospective date. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334.
4. This fact is also clear from perusal of the impugned order that the same has been passed without providing any notice or opportunity of hearing. Since the order has been passed in complete violation of natural justice hence same is liable to be set aside. Hence the order Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohammad Umar Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Head Constable Shayam Autar Dixit .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
dated 18.03.2025 is hereby quashed.
5. The writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
6. However, respondents are free to pass fresh order, in accordance with law, only after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. May 14, 2026 Pramod Tripathi WRIA No. 7298 of 2026 2 (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAKASH PADIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad