Indra Dev Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Cane Development Sugur Industries U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Indra Dev Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Cane Development Sugur Industries U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

With consent of counsel, writ petition disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner submits a representation within ten days before respondent No.2, respondent No.2 shall decide it by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of the order along with the representation; the Court did not go into the merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the sixth Pay Commission arrears of the petitioner, who retired on superannuation on 31.07.2011 and is a senior citizen aged about 71 years, can be paid by the respondents in installments (five half-yearly installments per the order dated 05.11.2024) instead of as a lump sum.

Court's answer

If the petitioner submits a representation within ten days before respondent No.2, respondent No.2 shall endeavour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order along with the representation.

Key takeaways

The Court has not gone into the merits of the case; the petition is disposed of on the consent-based direction regarding the representation.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 5), WRIT - A No. 1970 of 2025, decided 18.2.2025 by Hon'ble Abdul Moin, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:10597. The petitioner, who retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2011 and is a senior citizen aged about 71 years, challenged the order of respondent No. 2 dated 05.11.2024 (Annexure 1) whereby arrears pertaining to the sixth pay commission were held admissible but indicated to be paid in five half-yearly installments. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court permitted the petitioner to submit a representation before respondent No. 2 within ten days and directed respondent No. 2 to endeavour to decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of the order along with the representation. Writ petition disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10597

Court No. - 5

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1970 of 2025

Petitioner :- Indra Dev Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Cane Development Sugur Industries U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Singh,Sanjana Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Paramanand Asthana

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no. 1 and 2 and Sri Paramanand Asthana, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 and 4.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided.

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite the petitioner having retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2011, vide the order of the respondent no. 2 dated 05.11.2024, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition, although the arrears pertaining to the sixth pay commission had been held to be admissible yet it has been indicated that the same would be paid to the petitioner in five half yearly installments.

Contention is that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged about 71 years having retired long there cannot be any occasion for the respondents to pay the amount as due to him in installments.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation before the respondent No.2 which may be directed to be decided within a fixed time frame to which learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no. 1 and 2 and Sri Paramanand Asthana, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 and 4 have no objection.

In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within ten days from today before the respondent No.2 then the respondent No.2 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation.

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Pachhere/-

Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench