Disposed

Mr. Beeram Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2023WRIA/14801/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking refund of deducted retiral dues. Since the grounds raised were considered prima facie appropriate for first-instance consideration, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the appropriate authority within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to submit fresh representation to Finance Controller/CAO, UP Police within two weeks; Respondent to decide by reasoned order within six weeks.

Mr. Beeram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177783

¶2

Court No. - 37

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14801 of 2023 Petitioner :- Mr. Beeram Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Braj Mohan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Case called out.

¶6

None appears for the petitioner.

¶7

It is informed that lawyers are abstaining from work, as such the Court has itself gone through the pleadings and has also heard learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶8

With the consent of learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, the writ petition is finally being disposed of.

¶9

The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to refund the amount deducted from the retiral dues of the petitioner.

¶10

From perusal of pleadings on record it emerges that after petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation certain amounts have been deducted from retiral dues of the petitioner and hence the petition.

¶11

The petitioner has raised various grounds on the basis of which relief has been sought. However the Court is of the view that the said grounds fall in the realm of the grounds to be considered by the respondents at the first instance.

¶12

In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a fresh representation within two weeks from today before the respondent no. 2 i.e. the Finance Controller / C.A.O. Uttar Pradesh Police Headquarters, Lucknow then the respondent no. 2 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation.

¶13

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of .

¶14

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim set forth by the petitioner.

¶15

Order Date :- 14.9.2023 J. K. Dinkar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mr. Beeram Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Beeram Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Ram Bharti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kapil Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pankaj Kumar and 81 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Om Prakash Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others