Disposed¶18

Ramesh Bihari and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Edu. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2026WRIA/1484/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ - A; mandamus; arrears of salary; regular and trained pay scale; order dated 14.09.2016; opposite party no. 3; Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education, District Unnao; fresh representation; disposed of without entering merits; State of U.P.; Department of Basic Education; liberty to represent; six weeks; fifteen days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioners to move a fresh representation before respondent no. 4/Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education, District Unnao within fifteen days; respondent no. 4 to consider and decide such representation in accordance with law within six weeks. No relief granted on the merits of the salary-arrears claim. ¶18

Ramesh Bihari and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Edu. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ in the nature of mandamus should issue commanding opposite party no. 4 to release the petitioners' arrears of salary in accordance with the order dated 14.09.2016 passed by opposite party no. 3 sanctioning regular and trained pay scale from the date of appointment.

¶11

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to move a fresh representation before respondent no. 4/Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education, District Unnao, within fifteen days.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

In case such representation is moved, respondent no. 4 is directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law, within a further period of six weeks.

¶17

Key takeaways

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), WRIT - A No. - 1484 of 2026, Ramesh Bihari and another v. State of U.P. through Secy., Deptt. of Basic Education, Lucknow and 3 others; decided February 11, 2026 by Shree Prakash Singh, J. Petitioners sought mandamus directing opposite party no. 4 to release their arrears of salary according to the order dated 14.09.2016 passed by opposite party no. 3 sanctioning regular and trained pay scale from the date of appointment. On the joint request of counsel and without objection from the respondents, and without entering into the merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting liberty to move a fresh representation before respondent no. 4/Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education, District Unnao within fifteen days, and directing respondent no. 4 to consider and decide such representation in accordance with law within six weeks.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 1484 of 2026

¶3

Ramesh Bihari And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Basic Edu. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shankar Lal Pandey, Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Abhinav Singh

¶7

Court No. - 18

¶8

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and .

¶10

Instant petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

¶11

"(1) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties particularly opposite party no. 4 to release the arrears of salary of the petitioners according to the order dated 14.09.2016 passed by the opposite party no. 3, by means of this order the opposite party no. 3 has sanctioned and directed to pay the regular and trained pay scale from the date of appointment to the petitioners (contained at Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition)."

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners, after argument at length, submits that the interest of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court is pleased to give liberty to the petitioners to move fresh representation before the respondent no.4 within fifteen days and direct the respondent no.4 to consider and decide the same in accordance with law, within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

Learned counsels for the respondents have no objection to the submission aforesaid.

¶14

Be that as it may, without entering into merits of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to move fresh representation before the respondent no.4/Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education, District Unnao, within fifteen days and in case such representation is moved, the respondent no.4 is

¶15

WRIA No. 1484 of 2026

¶16

¶17

directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law, within further period of six weeks.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶19

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶20

February 11, 2026

¶21

Ram Murti

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ramesh Bihari and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Edu. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Bihari and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Edu. Lko. 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.K. Kakkar vs Mukhya Karyapalak Adhikari U.P. Khadi Evam Gram Udyog Board Lko. and 2 Others

Sunil Kapoor vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Energy Lko. and 2 Others

Ashim Rasool Siddiqi vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Minority Welfare and Waqfs Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Raunak Jahan vs Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad Thru. Director and 2 Others

Nanbabu and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. and Chief Secy. Home Lko.