Disposed

Sohit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Education (Basic) and 4 Others

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2025WRIA/13588/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this admission stage writ petition, the High Court at Lucknow directed the District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur, to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 14.06.2025 within eight weeks, dispensing with notice to one respondent.

What did the court decide?

Order directing the respondent (District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur) to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within eight weeks.

Sohit Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 13588 of 2025

Sohit Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Education (Basic) And 4 Others

¶7

Education (Basic) And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajai Kumar, Sachin Yadav, Satyendra Kumar Dwivedi, Shesh Ram Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 18

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

Since, the present matter is being decided at the admission stage, therefore, notice to opposite party no. 5 is hereby dispensed with.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶12

Instant writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs :-

¶13

"(i) to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties particularly the opposite party No 4 to grant appointment to the petitioner under "Dying-in-Harness Rules" as per his qualification within stipulated time, and pay salary from time to time as and when the same falls due.

¶14

(ii) to issue a writ order or direction in t nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to take decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 14.6.2025 (Annexure No.-5) to the writ petition within stipulated time."

¶15

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation on 1406-2025 before the opposite party no. 4/The District Inspector of Schools, District-Sitapur and the same is pending consideration. He further submits that the interest of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the opposite party no. 4 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within the stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this court.

¶16

WRIA No. 13588 of 2025

¶17

¶18

Learned counsels appearing for the opposite parties have no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶19

Be that as it may, without entering into the merits of the case, the opposite party no. 4/The District Inspector of Schools, DistrictSitapur, is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 14-06-2025 within a period of eight weeks, in accordance with law, from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

¶20

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶22

November 24, 2025 AKS

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sohit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Education (Basic) and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Education (Basic) and 4 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

Sushil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy.Food and Civil Supply Deptt.Lko.and Ors.

Krishna Kumar and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Basic Edu.Deptt.Civil Sectt.andORS

Jai Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Secondary Edu.Deptt.Lko.and Ors.

Anil Kumar Srivastava and 2 Others vs Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Arya Kumar and 9 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Basic Education Lko. and 3 Others

Pramod Kumar Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondary Edu. Lko. and 4 Others