Vinay Upadhyay and 110 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2025WRIA/7926/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grade Pay Rs.2800 Health Workers Uttar Pradesh; clause (6) Government order dated 19.12.2011; cut-off date 01.12.2011; parity in pay; Articles 14 and 16 Constitution of India; Article 226; extension of benefit of Kamal Deep Nirala (Writ - A No. 20255 of 2021, 04.07.2023) and Rekha Rani (Writ A No.2122 of 2025, 20.2.2025); arrears within four months; writ allowed; Manish Mathur J.; Lucknow Bench; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:41863.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as paid to other similarly situated persons, with arrears payable within four months from the date of the order. ¶¶29

Vinay Upadhyay and 110 Others Vs State of U.P… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondents to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as paid to other similarly situated persons, with arrears payable within four months from the date of the order.

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, Health Workers appointed after 01.12.2011, are entitled to Grade Pay of Rs.2,800 with arrears of salary from the retrospective date of their appointment, notwithstanding clause (6) of the Government order dated 19.12.2011.

¶¶7

Court's answer

The benefit of the judgment and order dated 20.2.2025 in Writ A No.2122 of 2025 (Rekha Rani and twenty others), which itself extended the benefit of the judgment dated 04.07.2023 in Kamal Deep Nirala, is granted to these petitioners, the State counsel having not disputed full coverage.

¶¶10

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is allowed; the respondents are directed to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as paid to the other similarly situated persons, with arrears payable within four months from the date of the order.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

The petitioners are directed to provide a copy of this order along with copies of the judgments dated 04.07.2023 and 20.2.2025 to the respondents for compliance of the directions.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Manish Mathur, J.), WRIT - A No. 7926 of 2025, decided 22.7.2025: Writ petition by Vinay Upadhyay and 110 others (Health Workers appointed after 01.12.2011) seeking Grade Pay of Rs.2,800 with arrears from the retrospective date of appointment, ignoring clause (6) of the Government order dated 19.12.2011, allowed on parity. Learned State Counsel did not dispute that the petitioners' case was fully covered by the judgment dated 20.2.2025 in Rekha Rani (Writ A No.2122 of 2025), which had extended the benefit of the judgment dated 04.07.2023 in Kamal Deep Nirala (Writ - A No. 20255 of 2021). Respondents directed to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- with arrears within four months; petitioners directed to furnish copies of the orders for compliance. The finding that the Government order violates Article 14 rests in the quoted judgments and was not independently adjudicated by this Court.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41863

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7926 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Vinay Upadhyay And 110 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Medical Health And Family Welfare Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeet Kumar,Eshita Bhasin,Kshitij Mishra,Ramendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.

¶7

Petition has been filed seeking direction to opposite parties to pay the petitioner(s) grade of Rs. 2,800 as is being paid to similarly situated persons appointed on or before 01.12.2011 ignoring clause (6) of the Government order dated 19.12.2011 including arrears of salary from retrospective date of their appointment.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is fully covered by the judgment and order of this Court dated 20.2.2025 passed in Writ A No.2122 of 2025 (Rekha Rani and twenty others Vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶9

Learned State counsel does not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶10

Accordingly, the present petitioners are also granted the benefit of the judgment and order dated 20.2.2025 passed in Writ A No.2122 of 2025 which is quoted as under:-

¶11

"1. Heard Sri Sanjay Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶12

2. Grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition is with regard to grant of Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- which is being denied to them on account of the fact that they have been appointed after 01.12.2011.

¶13

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the similar circumstances, this Court has allowed the writ petition filed by Kamal Deep Nirala and others being Writ - A No. 20255 of 2021 (decided on 04.07.2023). It is further submitted that review against order of this Court dated 04.07.2023 has also been rejected and the Special Appeal is pending.

¶14

4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the State Government has complied with the directions of this Court dated 04.07.2023.

¶15

5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶16

6. Accordingly, benefit of judgment and order dated 04.07.2023, passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 20255 of 2021 - Kamal Deep Nirala and Others Vs. State of U.P. Through Additional Chief Secretary, Medical and Health and Others (decided on 04.07.2023), is liable to be extended to the petitioners herein. For the sake of convenience, judgment and order dated 04.07.2023, is quoted herein below :-

¶17

"1. Heard Shri Sanjay Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Ashwani Kumar Singh Rathore, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

¶18

2. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking grade pay of Rs.2800/- as is being paid to other similarly placed Health Workers, who were appointed on or before 01.12.2011.

¶19

3. The petitioners have been appointed after due selection on the post of Health Worker (Male and Female) in the Health Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh. Admittedly, they have been appointed after 01.12.2011. The petitioners are given same pay scale of Rs.5200-20200/- as is being given to the Health Workers who were appointed before 01.12.2011. The only difference is fixation of grade pay inasmuch as the petitioners are being paid grade pay of Rs.2000/- whereas the similarly placed Health Workers appointed on or before 01.12.2011 are being paid grade pay of Rs.2800/-.

¶20

4. Shri Sanjay Misra, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that paying different grade pay to similarly appointed Health Workers on the ground of difference in their dates of appointment is wholly discriminatory and is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the petitioners are also entitled to be given the grade pay of Rs.2800/- as is being given to the similarly placed Health Workers who were appointed on or before 01.12.2011.

¶21

5. Shri Ashwani Kumar Singh Rathore, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents submits that the difference in grade pay is being given in pursuance of the government order dated 19.12.2011 which provides that the Health Workers appointed after 01.12.2011 would be given grade pay of Rs.2000/-. This Court asked a specific question to learned Standing Counsel that what was the basis for paying different grade pay to the Health Workers appointed on or before 01.12.2011 and the Health Workers appointed after 01.12.2011? to which he fairly submits that no reasoning is discernible in the government order except for cut of date for fixing the grade pay of Rs.2000/- instead of Rs.2800/-.

¶22

6. This Court finds that the executive instructions of the government order is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Government cannot discriminate in the matter of payment of salary in respect of similarly appointed Health Workers only on the basis of their dates of appointment.

¶23

7. In view thereof, the present petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay grade pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as is being paid

¶24

to other similarly placed Health Workers from the date of their appointment. The arrears should be paid to the petitioners within a period of four months from today."

¶25

7. In view of the above, benefit of judgment and order dated 04.07.2023, passed by this Court in the case of Kamal Deep Nirala and Others (supra), is also extended to the petitioner herein in same terms.

¶26

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

¶27

9. The respondents are directed to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as it has been paid to the other similarly situated persons. The arrears thereof shall be paid to the petitioners within next four months from today.

¶28

10. The petitioners are directed to provide a copy of this order alognwith copy of judgment and order dated 04.07.2023 to the respondents for compliance of the directions issued by this Court."

¶29

In view of the above, the present writ petition is also allowed. The respondents are directed to pay Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- to the petitioners as it has been paid to the other similarly situated persons. The arrears thereof shall be paid to the petitioners within next four months from today.

¶30

The petitioners are directed to provide a copy of this order alognwith copy of judgment and order dated 04.07.2023 and 20.2.2025 to the respondents for compliance of the directions issued by this Court.

¶31

Order Date :- 22.7.2025 prabhat

¶32

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

Vinay Upadhyay and 110 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Upadhyay and 110 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Triyugi Narain and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Taqdeer Jahan Vs General Manager Karmik Northern Railway Baroda House New Del

Vibhav Vs Nayab Tehsildar Nagar, Tehsil Sadar, Ayodhya and Others

Saurabh Kumar and 137 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl.Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health Family Welfare Lko. and Another

Tahseen Begum Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Bal Vikas Sewa Evam Pushtahar Lko and 5 Others

Balvant Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare U.P. Lko. and 2 Others