Disposed

Ashok Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC19 May 2023WRIA/6926/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pensioner sought release of post-retirement dues. High Court deemed the matter better addressed by the concerned official, directing the Executive Engineer to consider the pending representation and pass orders expeditiously within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Executive Engineer to consider the pending representation and pass appropriate orders within two months.

Ashok Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 4… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:109982

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6926 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Singh,Vimlesh Kumar Rai

¶7

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vimlesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel representing the Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 & 5 and learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of the State Respondent.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was superannuated on 31.01.2022 from the post of Chaukidar, Construction Division, U.P. Jal Nigam, Ballia, however, his post retiral dues have not been released in his favour so far. He submits that filing of the writ petition shall stand served if directions are issued to the Respondent No.5, Executive Engineer, Construction Division, U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban), Ballia, to pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the petitioner dated 18.07.2022.

¶10

Sri Vimlesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel representing the respondents submits that appropriate orders shall be passed upon the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, this Court is also of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition and the issue as regards the release of post retiral dues to the petitioner can be better addressed by the Respondent No.5 at the first instance.

¶11

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by requiring the Executive Engineer, Construction Division, U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Ballia, seized with the representation of the petitioner dated 18.07.2022, to consider all aspects of the matter and pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of service of certified copy of this order.

¶12

Needless to stay that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it shall be open for the Respondent No.5 to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 19.5.2023 pks

¶14

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashok Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Vinod Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Meena Kumari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Aradhana Rathour Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gaurishankar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others