Dinesh Kumar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Dinesh Kumar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to petitioners to file fresh individual representations before opposite party no.1 (Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow) or any other competent authority, to be considered and decided in light of the cited judgments, if applicable, within eight weeks of receipt of the representation(s) with certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioners are entitled to a direction for grant of pension and pensionary benefits by including services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin prior to their regularization, in light of the cited Supreme Court and High Court decisions.

Ratio / Principle

Since considering petitioners' grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to file fresh individual representations before opposite party no.1 (Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow) or any other competent authority, who shall consider and decide the same in light of the aforesaid judgments, in case they are applicable, within eight weeks from receipt of the fresh representation(s) along with a certified copy of this order.

Key takeaways

Although the decision in Jai Ram Sharma (supra) was indicated in the prayer, it will be applicable only in case any of the petitioners is superannuated.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Manish Mathur, J.), WRIT - A No. - 2217 of 2026, Dinesh Kumar And 6 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. And 3 Others, decided February 25, 2026: Petitioners sought a direction for pension and pensionary benefits by counting service rendered as Seasonal Collection Amin prior to their regularization, invoking the Supreme Court decision in Anand Prakash Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. (Civil Appeal No. 6118 of 2024, dt. 07.05.2024) and decisions of the High Court in Pratap NarayanPandey (Writ - A No. - 4031(S/S) of 2021), Daya Shankar Shukla (Writ - A No. - 32819 of 2019), Jag Prasad Chaubey (Writ-A No. 7620 of 2023) and Jai Ram Sharma (Writ-A No. 731 of 2024). Observing that the grievance involved factual aspects, the Court finally disposed of the petition, granting liberty to file fresh individual representations before the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (opposite party no.1) or any other competent authority, to be decided in light of the said judgments if applicable within eight weeks of receipt, with a certified copy of the order; the Jai Ram Sharma decision was clarified to be applicable only where a petitioner is superannuated.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 2217 of 2026

Dinesh Kumar And 6 Others

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. And 3 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : S.P. Singh Somvanshi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 7

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

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

Petition has been filed seeking a direction to authority concerned to provide pension and pensionary benefits by including services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin prior to regularization of petitioners in the light of judgment and order dated 07.05.2024 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6118 of 2024 by Supreme Court in the case of Anand Prakash Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. and others ; judgment and order dated 19.08.2006 passed in Writ - A No. - 4031(S/S) of 2021; ( Pratap NarayanPandey v. State of U.P. and others ); judgment and order dated 23.02.2023 passed in Writ - A No. - 32819 of 2019 ( Daya Shankar Shukla v. State of U.P. and others ); judgment and order dated 15.03.2024 passed by this Court in Writ-A No. 7620 of 2023, Jag Prasad Chaubey v. State of U.P. and others as well as judgment and order dated 04.11.2025 passed by this Court in bunch of writ petitions leading petition being Writ-A No. 731 of 2024, Jai Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. and others .

Since considering petitioners' grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioners to file fresh individual representations before opposite party no.1 i.e. Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow - or any other competent authority who shall consider and decide the same, in light of aforesaid

WRIA No. 2217 of 2026

2

judgments, in case same are applicable, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of fresh representation(s) along with a certified copy of this order. It is clarified that although the decision in Jai Ram Sharma (supra), has been indicated in the prayer, the same will be applicable only in case any of petitioners is superannuated.

With aforesaid direction(s), the petition is finally disposed of.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

February 25, 2026

kvg/-

Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench