Allahabad High Court
WRIA/14712/2025 of RAJ KUMAR PRATHAM ALIAS RAJ KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY., REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 18 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14712 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner is granted liberty to amend the prayer clause of petition to include
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 14712 of 2025
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, 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 petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner is granted liberty to amend the prayer clause of petition to include 'entire benefits'.
3. Petition has been filed seeking mainly for the following relief(s):- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite parties, particularly opposite party number 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for providing all consequential service benefits by treating the initial appointment of the petitioner as 18.05.1993 as substantive appointment and accordingly provide all service benefit including promotion and pay scales from 18.05.1993 including the entire benefits;
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite parties to compute the services rendered by the petitioner as seasonal Peon prior to regularization for the purpose of computing the and other entire benefits;"
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance on judgment rendered by this Court in Patap Narain Pandey v. State of U.P. & others [Writ Petition No.4031(S/S) of 2001] as well as decision in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhans, Shikha Srivastava, Yogesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Raj Kumar Pratham Alias Raj Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
State of U.P. and others v. Jag Prasad Chaubey rendered in Special Appeal No.191 of 2024.
4. Since considering petitioner's grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to file fresh representation before opposite party no.2 i.e.Board of Revenue U.P., Lucknow through its Chairman. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided by authority concerned expeditiously by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks from receipt of representation of petitioner along with a certified copy of this order in the light of aforesaid decisions, in case the same are applicable upon petitioner.
5. With aforesaid direction, the petition stands finally disposed of. December 18, 2025 lakshman WRIA No. 14712 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench