Allahabad High Court
WRIA/15220/2025 of SHYAM KUMAR TIWARI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY./PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF FOREST LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 19 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 15220 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned state counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed seeking following prayers:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 15220 of 2025
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, 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 petitioner and learned state counsel for opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed seeking following prayers:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay pension and other post-retiral benefits to the petitioner, counting the service rendered by him prior to his regularization on daily wage basis since July, 1987 under the old pension scheme.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to grant the pay-scale, benefits of assured career progression and all consequential service benefits after including the services rendered by the petitioner on daily wage basis. "
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Prem Singh v. State of U.P. and others reported in (2019) 10 SCC 516 as well as judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Jai Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. and others [WRIT
- A No. - 731 of 2024].
4. Since petitioner's grievances would require consideration of factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to make a fresh representation before opposite party No.
i.e. Additional Chief Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Chandra Tewari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Shyam Kumar Tiwari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Forest Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
Secretary/Principal Secretary, Department of Forest, Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow or any other competent authority. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided in the light of judgments rendered in the cases of Prem Singh (supra) and Jai Ram Sharma (supra) in case the same are applicable, within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority.
4. The petition stands disposed of. December 19, 2025 prabhat WRIA No. 15220 of 2025
(Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench