Dismissed¶5

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. v. Rajendra Kumar Sonwani and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2025WRIA/470/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: permanent reduction of 2% monthly pension; competent authority order dated 06.01.2022; learned Tribunal claim petition and review application set aside; State of U.P. Public Works Department writ petitioner; Rajendra Kumar Sonwani opposite party no.1; no allegation of financial loss; savings duly accounted for utilised on ancillary works; extraordinary writ jurisdiction — no interference; WRIT - A No. 470 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:2723-DB; bench Attau Rahman Masoodi and Subhash Vidyarthi; dismissed 16.1.2025; Lucknow Bench.

What did the court decide?

None — the learned Tribunal's judgment/orders (claim petition and review application) were left undisturbed; the writ petition was dismissed as bereft of merit. ¶5

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. Vs Rajendra Kumar Sonwani and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None — the learned Tribunal's judgment/orders (claim petition and review application) were left undisturbed; the writ petition was dismissed as bereft of merit.

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment/orders of the learned Tribunal setting aside the competent authority's pension-reduction order call for interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. +1 more

¶4

Court's answer

Since there was no allegation of financial loss and the learned Tribunal had recorded its findings on appreciation of facts, this Court had no reason to take a different view; consequently the Tribunal's judgment/order in the claim petition as well as in the review application did not call for any interference in exercise of the Court's extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that the allegations were not of a nature as would have caused a loss to the State Government; rather, the savings from a particular work performed by the opposite party no.1, though duly accounted for, were utilised against some ancillary works.

¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - A No. 470 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (decision 16.1.2025; bench: Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi, J. and Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi, J.; Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:2723-DB). The State of U.P. (through the Principal Secretary/Addl. Chief Secretary, Public Works Department, Lucknow) petitioned against the learned Tribunal's setting aside of the competent authority's order dated 06.01.2022, which had permanently reduced the monthly pension of the opposite party no.1, Rajendra Kumar Sonwani, by 2%; the Tribunal had adjudicated both the claim petition and a subsequent review application. The High Court held that the allegations concerned were not such as would have caused a loss to the State Government — the savings from a particular work performed by the opposite party no.1, though duly accounted for, having been utilised against some ancillary works — and that, as there was no allegation of financial loss and the Tribunal had recorded its findings on appreciation of facts, the Tribunal's judgment/orders did not call for interference in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed as bereft of merit.

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. v. Rajendra Kumar Sonwani and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. v. Rajendra Kumar Sonwani and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Srawan Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. and Ors.

State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Defence Lko. and 2 Others Vs Prem Shankar Kanth

Vijay Pratap Singh Vs Rajiv Kumar Mishra and 4 Others

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Appointment and Personnel Lko. and 4 Others Vs Ram Kumar and 2 Others

Altaf vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko and 6 Others

Vinod Tiwari Vs District Magistrate District Kheri and 8 Others