Disposed

Pradeep Kumar Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/6203/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought de-linking of pension from mandatory service. Court permitted filing of a representation. Directs respondent to decide within eight weeks. Court expressly declined to adjudicate merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.1 to consider petitioner's representation and issue a reasoned/speaking order within eight weeks.

Pradeep Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70215

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6203 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suyash Misra,Virendra Mishra

¶6

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶7

Short counter affidavit by Sri Virendra Mishra, Advocate on behalf of the respondent no. 4 be kept on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Sri Virendra Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.

¶9

Instant writ petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to de-link the petitioner's pension from 33 years of mandatory service and give the benefit and pension on the basis of the office memorandum dated 05.07.2016 along with interest.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation before the respondent No.1 which may be directed to be decided within a fixed time frame to which learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel as well as Sri Virendra Mishra, Advocate have no objection.

¶11

In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before the respondent No.1 then the respondent No.1 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶13

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 Pachhere/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pradeep Kumar Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 3 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. and Ors.

Awdhesh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P Thru Prin Secy Khadi Gramodyog Lko and Ors.

Raghav Prasad Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Renu Mahesh Institute of Nursing Sciences Thru. Manager/Secy. Renu Mahesh vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education Lko. and 5 Others

Jitendra Mohan Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Madhyamik Education Lko. and 3 Others

Shashipal Singh Chauhan vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication New Delhi and 2 Others