Disposed

Hamid Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2025WRIA/2463/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotional pay of Driver Grade-I with grade pay upgrades per government orders; his representation was pending before the authorities. Without entering merits, the court directed respondent No. 2 to decide the representation dated 11.02.2025 within six weeks in accordance with law.

What the court decided

AI extract

Hamid Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12714

¶2

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2463 of 2025 Petitioner :- Hamid Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Govt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- I.M. Pandey Ist,Ajeet Verma Counsel for Resp Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶4

The grievance of the petitioner is with reagrd to grant of promotional pay of Direver Grade-I n Pay Band of Rs. 930034800/- Grade Pay - 4200/- due on completion of 18 years service along with further consequential upgraded pay of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 w.e.f. 01.05.2015 in accordance with Government Order No. 13-12/93 T.C. Ka - 1-142/2009 dated 06.07.2009 and Government Order No. 13/ 12-93 -Ka-1-2013 dated 08.05.2013.

¶5

In this regard, it has been submitted that petitioner has given a representation dated 11.02.2025 to the respondent which is pending consideration and has not been decided so far.

¶6

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2025 (Annexure No. 15) in a time bound manner.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel does not object if a direction is issued to respondent for expeditious disposal of the representation preferred by the petitioner.

¶8

Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2025 (Annexure No. 15) expeditiously, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him in accordance with law.

¶9

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶10

Order Date :- 3.3.2025/Ravi/

¶11

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Hamid Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Hamid Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sudhir Kumar Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Gram Vikas Vibhag U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Dheerendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of Environment Forest and Climate Change Lko. and 2 Others

Kalawati Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Women and Child Development and 2 Others

Ankit Tyagi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Shobhit Srivastava and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Law Lko. and 4 Others

Vidya Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Public Work Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and 3 Others