Balram Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19857

Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3812 of 2025 Petitioner :- Balram Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ram Pratap Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 4.

¶5

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

¶6

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties 3 to 4 to lock the data and feed the on-line details of the petitioner in the interest of justice.

¶7

ii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing to the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to continue his work with the department as Prantiya Rakshak Dal Provincial Guard and pay regularly, in the interest of justice.

¶8

iii. Issue any other writ, order or direction which may be deemed just and warranted on the facts and circumstances of the case. iv. Award the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has given

¶10

of required details online to Shri Vikas Verma BO PRD Regional/Youth Welfare and Regional Development Team Officer Jarwal to lock his data and feed it online but he demanded Rs.20,000/-about which when the petitioner complained, Vikas Verma compelled the petitioner to write on a plain paper that

¶11

no money was demanded from the petitioner and further said that your data will be uploaded but till date the data has not been uploaded.

¶12

On the other hand, Shri Ram Pratap Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing

¶13

Counsel, on the basis of written instructions, which is taken on record, has submitted that the petitioner is not a volunteer selected and trained as per the prescribed procedure. The petitioner received the duty on the basis of fabricated documents without receiving legitimate initial training, keeping the then personnel of the District Youth Welfare and Regional Development Team Officer Office Bahraich in the dark about the actual facts. After the District Youth Welfare and Regional Development Team Officer, Bahraich came to know that the petitioner was not a volunteer, he did not feed the data of the petitioner on the portal and stopped providing duty. Since the petitioner has never been a legally enrolled volunteer in the Provincial Guard, the District Youth Welfare and Regional Development Team Officer, Bahraich did not find it necessary to issue any order regarding removing the petitioner from duty.

¶14

Perused the record.

¶15

On due consideration to the rival contentions of both the parties, this Court deems it appropriate give liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before opposite party no.3.

¶16

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before opposite party no.3 within two weeks' form today. The opposite party no.2, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, shall decide the same within a further period of four weeks' by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balram Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Reshmi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Bal Vikas Sewa Pustahar Deptt. Lko. and 8 Others

Anita Kanogiya and 74 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health and 5 Others

Amitendra Prabhat Vs Secy. U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission and Another

Man Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and 3 Others

Dr. Ram Vishal Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Ayush Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Rural Engineering Lko and 2 Others