Petitioner sought post-retiral dues and pension benefits for ad-hoc service. Court directed respondent to consider petitioner's representation on pension eligibility promptly.
Direction to respondent to decide petitioner's representation on ad-hoc service and pension within eight weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:19729
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1728 of 2024
Petitioner :- Dr. Sanjiv Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag-I U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui,Shiv Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Order Date :- 5.3.2024 Nitesh
Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to post-retiral dues and pensionary benefits for ad-hoc service.
Whether the representation of the petitioner regarding ad-hoc service should be decided expeditiously.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Ram Sharan Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and othersDistinguished¶10
Dr. Ram Sharan Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and others; Writ-A No.15529 of 2018
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Sanjiv Kumar Singh
State Of U.P.
Manish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
