Disposed

Surendra Kumar Mishra and 22 Others v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2025WRIA/347/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Additional increment of pay on completion of 19 years of service; Sub Inspectors, Uttar Pradesh State Police; Article 226 writ petition; Ghanshyam Tiwari (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 44330 of 2012); Virendra Kumar (Writ - A No. 48601 of 2015); Special Appeal (Defective) No. 538 of 2016 dismissed 07.09.2016; SLP CC 6316 of 2017 dismissed 03.04.2017; Radhe Shyam Yadav (Writ - A No. 6753 of 2023);

What did the court decide?

No immediate monetary relief; petition disposed of with a direction that each petitioner move an individual representation along with the certified copy of the order, upon which the claim shall be con

Surendra Kumar Mishra and 22 Others vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56471

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 347 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar Mishra And 22 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel.

¶7

By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioners who were working as Sub Inspector in State Police, want an additional increment of pay on completion of 19 years of service in the light of judgment of this Court in the case of Ghanshyam Tiwari vs. State of U.P. & others passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 44330 of 2012 which was followed in the judgment of Virendra Kumar and another v. State of U.P. & 3 Others , Writ - A No. 48601 of 2015 against which Special Appeal (Defective) No. 538 of 2016 came to be dismissed on 07.09.2016 so also the Special Leave Petition CC 6316 of 2017 came to be dismissed on 03.04.2017.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that this legal position has remained intact as on date and many such employees as petitioners have been accorded benefit. He has also placed before the Court recent order of this Court passed in the case of Radhe Shyam Yadav & 4 Others v. State of U.P. & 6 Others , Writ - A No. 6753 of 2023.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the aforesaid legal position.

¶10

In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that each of the petitioners is required to move their individual

¶11

representation along with the certified copy of this order and in the event representation is made, petitioners' claim shall be considered and disposed of in terms of the judgment of Ghanshyam Tiwari ( supra ) by passing appropriate orders within a period of two weeks of receipt of fresh representation.

¶12

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Deepika

¶13

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

Surendra Kumar Mishra and 22 Others v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Kumar Mishra and 22 Others v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sangeeta Varshney vs Deepak Kumar Sharma

Smt. Leelawati vs Ashok Kumar

Pugchins Real Estate LLP vs M/S Fluper Ltd.

Satish Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ram Niwas Pandey vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rudra Pratap Singh and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and 4 Others