Disposed

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2024/843/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerns the non-payment of post-retiral dues and pension benefits counting the petitioner's ad-hoc service. The court directed the respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's representation on pension entitlement by a reasoned order within eight weeks, following a precedent.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Chief Secretary to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2024 regarding pension entitlement by a reasoned order within eight weeks.

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:15896

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 843 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui,Jahan Singh Yadav,Shiv Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Mohd. Tauseef Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite parties.

¶7

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was duly appointed on the post of Medical OfÏcer on 18.06.1988 and in pursuance thereof he joined on 25.06.1988.

¶8

It is stated that the petitioner was selected in accordance with the Rules and against the clear vacancies. It is further stated that the services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 16.03.2005 and has been superannuated on 30.06.2023 from Rajkiya Ayurvedic Chikitsalaya Nagar, Bahraich.

¶9

The grievance raised in the present petition is with regard to the non-payment of post retiral dues and pensionary benefits counting his ad-hoc service rendered by his in the Department towards grant of pension and other post retiral dues along with the arrears and interest.

¶10

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in similar circumstances a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has the case of Dr. Ram Sharan Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and others passed in Writ-A No.15529 of 2018 on 15.09.2021 and while allowing the writ petition had held that the services rendered by the petitioner therein on ad-hoc basis would be counted towards qualifying service and consequently the petitioner was held to be entitled for pension. While allowing the said writ petition, this Court had considered the provisions of the U.P. Qualifying Service for pension and Validation Act, 2021.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case opposite party no.1 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 07.01.2024, contained as Annexure No.6 to the petition expeditiously.

¶12

Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶13

8.In view of above, the present writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the opposite party no.1/Appar Chief Secretary, Ayush Anubhag-I, Government of U.P. Lucknow to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 07.01.2024, contained as Annexure No.6 to the petition by a reasoned and speaking order in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. Ram Sharan Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and others; Writ-A No.15529 of 2018 expeditiously, say, within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him.

¶14

Order Date :- 22.2.2024 Nitesh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Revenue and Others

Sofia Begum Vs Senior Police Superintendent Faizabad and Others

Vijay Kumar Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Medical and Health Deptt. and Ors.

Shiv Saran Supervisor and 79 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Irrigation Deptt. and 10 Others

Ravi Prakash Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.through Principal Secy. P.W.D.Lko. and Others

Krishna Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Ors.