Santosh Kumar vs the State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Santosh Kumar vs the State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application/representation before respondent no. 2 within three weeks with a certified copy of the order; respondent no. 2 directed to consider and decide it strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within six weeks of production of the certified copy, if there is no legal impediment.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to remuneration for the work of driver/operator discharged in the respondent-Nagar Nigam and payment of second Saturday and Sunday allowances from the time of his promotion to the post of Safai Nayak, with all consequential benefits along with interest.

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh application/representation ventilating all grievances, supported by documents, before respondent no. 2 within three weeks along with a certified copy of the order.

Key takeaways

On such representation being made, respondent no. 2 shall consider and decide it strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, preferably within six weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Manju Rani Chauhan, J.), by order dated November 19, 2025 in Writ - A No. - 16955 of 2025, disposed of the writ petition filed by Santosh Kumar seeking a direction to respondent no. 2 to grant him remuneration for driver/operator work discharged in the respondent-Nagar Nigam and payment of second Saturday and Sunday allowances from his promotion to the post of Safai Nayak, with consequential benefits and interest. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court permitted the petitioner to move a fresh application/representation ventilating all grievances, with supporting documents, before respondent no. 2 within three weeks along with a certified copy of the order, and directed respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, preferably within six weeks of production of the certified copy, if there is no legal impediment.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 16955 of 2025

Santosh Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

The State Of U.P. And Another		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Aditya Prakash Shailesh Verma	Verma, Ranjana Verma,
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Abhinava Krishna	Srivastava, C.S.C.

Court No. - 52

HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

The petitioner has preferred instant writ petition for a direction upon respondent no. 2 to consider petitioner's claim and grant him remuneration for the work of driver/ operator discharged by him in the respondent- Nagar Nigam and also direct the payment of second Saturday and Sunday allowances to him from the time petitioner was promoted to the post of Safai Nayak as per relevant rules with all consequential benefits along with interest.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for ventilation of his grievance, the petitioner has approached the authority concerned by moving several representations, but nothing has been done till date.

Mr. Siddharth Krishna, learned Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Abhinava Krishna Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that in case petitioner moves fresh application/representation before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, however, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioner may make fresh application/representation ventilating all grievances, supported by such documents, as may be advised, before the respondent no.2 within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order. On such representation being made, respondent no.2 shall make all endeavours to consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

November 19, 2025 DS

(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)

Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad