Disposed¶13

Naresh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2025WRIA/7143/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Manish Mathur J., 7.7.2025; WRIT - A No. 7143 of 2025; Naresh Kumar v. State of U.P.; counting of Indian Army service for salary fixation in U.P. Police; government order dated 26.08.1977; G.O. dated 18.05.1983; mandamus for salary fixation and arrears with interest; non-consideration of representation; direction to decide by reasoned speaking order within three months; disposed of without opinion on merits; standing counsel; 2025:AHC-LKO:38160.

What did the court decide?

Procedural relief only: liberty to make a fresh representation before respondent no.4 within two weeks, to be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned speaking order, preferably within three months, if there is no legal impediment; no opinion expressed on merits. ¶13

Naresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38160

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7143 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Naresh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed for following relief:

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No. 4 & 5 to carry out the fixation of salary of petitioner in terms of government order dated 26.08.1977 and G. O. dated 18.05.1983 contained as ANNEXURE No.3 & 4 to this writ petition.

¶9

(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay difference of arrears of salary after fixation along with appropriate interest.

¶10

(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.

¶11

(iv) Allow the writ petition with cost."

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was initially working in Indian Army and subsequently, he has been appointed in Police Department of the State of U.P., therefore, in view of the settled legal position, the services rendered by the petitioner in Indian Army is to be counted for the purposes of fixation of his salary and other benefits. For the said grievances, he has made representation before the authority concerned but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Hence the present writ petition.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that petitioner may make a fresh representation

¶14

individually, ventilating all his grievances, supported by such documents, as he may be advised, before respondent no.4, within two weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order. On such representation being made, respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned speaking order, preferably within three months thereafter, if there is no legal impediment.

¶15

Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Virendra

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Naresh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

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

Buddhilal Vs State of U.P. through Secy.

Amiy Krishna Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Ratnesh Kumar Trivedi and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 10 Others

Satendra Kumar Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

General Manager Northern Railway Board and Anors. Vs Addl.Distt.Judge Lcuknow and 2 Ors.

Raj Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Ayush Deptt. ANUBHAG-1 Lko. and 2 Others