Allahabad High Court
WRIA/13835/2025 of SHAMIMUL HASAN Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. DEPTT. RAJYA SAMPATTI, U.P., LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 3 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13835 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Amendment Application filed today is taken on record. 3. Since amendment sought
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 13835 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 the opposite parties.
2. Amendment Application filed today is taken on record.
3. Since amendment sought is relatable to the initial prayer made, the same is allowed.
4. Consequential amendments in the memorandum of petition shall be incorporated during course of the day.
5. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking a direction to authority concerned to consider grievance of petitioner for release of retiral and consequential benefits in light of Government Orders to which he is entitled, after judgment and order dated 02.05.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal no.816 of 2006 by High Court at Calcutta acquitting petitioner of criminal allegations levelled against him.
6. Since considering petitioner's grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to file fresh representation before opposite party no.1 i.e. Secretary, Department of Rajya Sampatti Government of U.P., Lucknow. 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kartikay Singh, Vijay Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Shamimul Hasan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Rajya Sampatti, U.P., Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
period of six weeks from receipt of representation of petitioner along with a certified copy of this order.
7. With aforesaid direction, the petition stands finally disposed of. December 3, 2025 kvg/- WRIA No. 13835 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench