Vijay Bahadur Bind vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vijay Bahadur Bind vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim direction to the opposite parties to ensure payment of the petitioner's sanctioned dues by the next date of listing; matter adjourned and to be listed fresh on 04.12.2025 at 02:15 p.m. for production of the Screening Committee orders dated 23.01.2019 and 11.08.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the opposite parties must effect actual payment of the petitioner's sanctioned dues, which admittedly remain unpaid apart from provisional pension. +1 more

Court's answer

Observing that the counter affidavit admits the petitioner was found unsuitable only for grant of ACP and that the opposite parties admit having sanctioned his remaining dues, the court directed the opposite parties to ensure payment of those dues by the next date of listing.

Ratio / Principle

The case was directed to be listed fresh on 04.12.2025 at 02:15 p.m. to enable learned State Counsel to bring on record the Screening Committee orders dated 23.01.2019 and 11.08.2025, leaving the substantive questions open until then.

Key takeaways

It is admitted in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was found only unsuitable for grant of ACP.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 7 (Manish Mathur, J.), WRIT - A No. 11296 of 2025, interim/sessional order dated November 12, 2025 in Vijay Bahadur Bind v. State of U.P. (through Principal Secretary, Revenue, Lucknow) and others. The counter affidavit records that the petitioner had been awarded major/minor penalties vide various orders, of which the punishments dated 27.03.2000, 06.07.2007, 01.02.2012 and 30.07.2013 were cancelled upon his representation while others stand; owing to unsatisfactory service the Screening Committee decided in its meeting of 23.01.2019 not to provide time-scale pay/benefit of ACP, reconsidering the aspect on 11.08.2025, though neither order is on record. Learned State Counsel adverted to an order dated 01.01.2020 sanctioning various benefits due to the petitioner way-back on 08.11.2000 (a date the Judge observes appears incorrect); counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the sanction no actual payment has been made and, except provisional pension, no benefit has been paid. Noting that the counter affidavit admits the petitioner was found unsuitable only for grant of ACP and that the remaining dues stand sanctioned, the court directed the opposite parties to ensure payment of the dues by the next date of listing and ordered the case fresh on 04.12.2025 at 02:15 p.m. for bringing on record the Screening Committee orders dated 23.01.2019 and 11.08.2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 11296 of 2025

Vijay Bahadur Bind

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 4 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ajay Kumar Singh : C.S.C.

Court No. - 7

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Counter affidavit clearly indicates the fact that petitioner had already been awarded major/minor penalties vide various orders as described in paragraph - 8 of the counter affidavit but upon representation being made by petitioner, punishments awarded vide orders dated 27.03.2000, 06.07.2007, 01.02.2012 and 30.07.2013 were cancelled while other punishments are still in place. It is also indicated that due to the aforesaid unsatisfactory service, the Screening Committee in the meeting held on 23.01.2019 decided not to provide time-scale pay/benefit of ACP, while the same aspect was again considered by the Screening Committee on 11.08.2025. However, neither of the two orders are on record.

Learned State Counsel, on the basis of instructions, has also adverted to the order dated 01.01.2020, a copy of which is taken on record and as per which, various benefits due to the petitioner have been sanctioned to him way-back on 08.11.2000 (which appears to be incorrect).

Learned counsel for petitioner, on the basis of instructions, however

WRIA No. 11296 of 2025

2

submits that despite aforesaid sanction, actual payment has not been made and except for provisional pension, no other benefit has been paid.

In view thereof, list this case on 04.12.2025, as fresh at 02.15 p.m. in order to enable learned State Counsel to bring on record the orders dated 23.01.2019 and 11.08.2025.

Even otherwise, from the counter affidavit, it is admitted that petitioner was found only unsuitable for grant of ACP.

Considering the aforesaid facts as well as the fact that opposite parties admit having sanctioned the remaining dues of the petitioner, as state above, opposite parties shall ensure payment of the aforesaid dues to petitioner by the next date of listing.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

November 12, 2025

lakshman

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