Allahabad High Court
WRIA/14544/2025 of LEKHRAJ Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HORTICULTURE LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 17 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14544 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties for grant of minimum
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 14544 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 appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties for grant of minimum of pay-scale as per revised recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission.
3. It has been submitted that petitioner is working as Daily Wager since 2007 and by means of order dated 23.9.2015, he was granted minimum of the pay-scale of a Class IV posts in terms of the 6th Pay Commission but despite revision of the minimum of the pay-scale in terms of 7th Pay Commission recommendations, the revised scale has not been implemented.
4. Learned counsel has place reliance on judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ A No.1287 of 2023 (Pradeep Kumar Shukla versus State of U.P. & Ors.) and seeks benefits of same.
5. For the aforesaid grievance, petitioner is granted liberty to make fresh representation before opposite party no.2. At present learned counsel for petitioner restricts his prayer for a final decision with regard to same.
6. Considering innocuous prayer being made by learned counsel for petitioner and without entering into the merits of the case petitioner is granted liberty to file fresh representation before opposite party No.2 i.e. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd. Ateeq Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Lekhraj .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
Director, Horticulture & Food Processing, 2-Sapru Marg, Lucknow. In case such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided in the light of judgment rendered in the case of Pradeep Kumar Shukla (supra) within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority. Petitioner shall annex copy of order passed in the aforesaid case alongwith certified copy of this order.
7. With the aforesaid observation, petition stands disposed of. December 17, 2025 Subodh/- WRIA No. 14544 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench