Disposed

Dev Narayan Dubey and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2025/7203/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought computation of service period as Daily Wagers and continuation of NPS deductions. The Court granted liberty to make a fresh representation before the Superintendent Engineer to be decided within eight weeks in light of Supreme Court and High Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to make fresh representation before competent authority within eight weeks.

Dev Narayan Dubey and Another Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 7203 of 2023

¶3

Dev Narayan Dubey And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Irrigation Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Saryu Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 7

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned state counsel for opposite parties.

¶10

Petition has been filed seeking following prayers:-

¶11

" a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Party Nos. 2, 3, 4 & 5 to compute the period rendered by the Petitioners Nos. 1 & 2 as Daily Wager and Work Charge employees in their services for the purpose of qualifying service.

¶12

b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Party Nos. 4 & 5 to continue deduction of money from the salary of the Petitioners Nos. 1 & 2 under New Pension Scheme (NPS)."

¶13

Learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Prem Singh v. State of U.P. and others reported in (2019) 10 SCC 516 as well as judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Jai Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. and others [WRIT - A No. - 731 of 2024].

¶14

Since petitioner's grievances would require consideration of factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to make a fresh representation before opposite party No. 3 i.e. Superintendent Engineer, Department of Irrigation, Telibagh, Lucknow or any other competent authority. In case such a representation is filed, the same is required to be decided in the light of

¶15

WRIA No. 7203 of 2023

¶16

¶17

judgments rendered in the cases of Prem Singh (supra) and Jai Ram Sharma (supra) in case the same are applicable, within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority.

¶18

The petition stands disposed of.

¶19

(Manish Mathur,J.)

¶20

December 4, 2025

¶21

prabhat

¶22

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

Dev Narayan Dubey and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Narayan Dubey and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation Lko. and 4 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

Similar cases

Shashi Bhushan Singh and Ors. Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Irrigation Deptt. Lko and Ors.

Kamlesh Kumar Mishra and 14 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources Deptt. and 2 Others

Chiroji Lal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sinchai Vibhag Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Bilas vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Deptt. and 2 Others

Shiv Ram Singh Yadav (PNO-842356206) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Kurmi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. and 2 Others