Disposed¶15

Ram Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2026WRIA/19307/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WRIT - A No. - 19307 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, decided January 19, 2026 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) — interim order. Retired Assistant Teacher Ram Singh Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others: petitioner seeks payment of unpaid first, second and third ACP benefits and 7th Pay Commission benefits with 18% arrears till actual payment (retired 31.03.2016 after 35 years' service); Standing Counsel objects to ~ten-year filing delay and absence of appointment documents; two weeks granted to obtain instructions; next date 06.02.2026. No substantive adjudication, statutes, precedents, or amounts stated.

What did the court decide?

No substantive adjudication; two weeks' time granted to the Standing Counsel to obtain instructions and the petition ordered to be put up as fresh on 06.02.2026. ¶15

Ram Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 19307 of 2025

Ram Singh Yadav

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Awadh Narayan Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 52

¶10

HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶12

The writ petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the respondents to pay entire remaining benefits along with 18% arrears till the date of actual payment.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was working as an Assistant Teacher in Junior High School, Faridpur, Audhan, District Kaushambi, retired on 31.03.2016 after serving 35 years of service, however, he has not been paid the benefits of the first, second and third ACP, nor the benefits under the 7th Pay Commission. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondents to make the actual payment of the aforesaid amounts in view of the letters issued by the respective respondents.

¶14

Mr. Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel, submits that there is no proper explanation for the delay in filing the petition, which has been filed nearly ten years after the retirement of the petitioner. He further submits that no documents pertaining to the appointment of the petitioner have been annexed. He prays for, and is granted, two weeks' time to obtain instructions in this regard.

¶15

Put up as fresh on 06.02.2026.

¶16

January 19, 2026 Rahul.

¶17

(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Deepak Mandal vs State of U.P.

Asad Ullah Khan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narayan Hari vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Narain Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shivam Mishra and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Anamika Chauhan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others