Allowed¶15

Onkar Nath Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2025WRIA/3088/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ petition allowed; order dated 06.02.2024 quashed; matter covered by Vinod Kumar Srivastava vs. State of U.P., Writ-A No. 21492 of 2023, decided 30.09.2024; benefit of earlier judgment extended to petitioner; State of U.P., Additional Chief Secretary Secondary Education; consent-based final disposal; respondent No.8 served but absent; single judge Abdul Moin, J.; Lucknow Bench; judgment dated 10.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; order dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure-1 to the petition) quashed; petitioner declared entitled to the benefit of the judgment in Writ-A No. 21492 of 2023 (Vinod Kumar Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and 3 others, decided 30.09.2024). ¶15

Onkar Nath Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3088 of 2024

Onkar Nath Shukla

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. And 7 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Pawan Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Raj Kr Singh Suryvanshi

¶9

Court No. - 4

¶10

HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Piyush Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 6 and Sri Raj Kumar Singh Suryvanshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.7.

¶12

Despite notice being issued to respondent No.8 and having been served as per the office report dated 02.07.2024, none responds on behalf of the respondent No.8.

¶13

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

¶14

There is a consensus at the bar that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment and order of this Court passed in a bunch of writ petitions leading being Writ-A No.21492 of 2023 in re: Vinod Kumar Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and 3 others , decided on 30.09.2024 .

¶15

Considering the aforesaid consensus, the writ petition is allowed . The order impugned dated 06.02.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, is quashed.

¶16

It is provided that the petitioner of the instant petition would also be entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid judgment.

¶17

September 10, 2025 Pachhere/-

¶18

(Abdul Moin,J.)

¶19

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

Onkar Nath Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Onkar Nath Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sipek Kumar Biswas Vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railways, Railway Board New Delhi and 4 Others

Rajat Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dairy Development Lko. and 4 Others

Aditya Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of State Food and Civil Supplies Lko. and 2 Others

C/M Dr. G.K. Jaitley Inter College Akbarpur Ambedkar Nagar Thru. Its Manager and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin./Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondary Education Lko. and 4 Others

Shushil Kumar and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Communication, New Delhi and 2 Others

Chandra Bhan Yadav Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Deptt. Telecommunications, Ministry Comm. New Delhi and 2 Others