Disposed

Devendra Kumar and 14 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2026WRIA/2238/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought pay-scale upgradation and consequential pension/service benefits in terms of prior judgments affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Court directed them to file fresh individual representations before the competent authority, to be decided within eight weeks in light of those judgments if applicable.

What the court decided

AI extract

Devendra Kumar and 14 Others vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 2238 of 2026

¶3

Devendra Kumar And 14 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Lko. And Another

¶7

Engineering Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Birendra Kumar Yadav, Amit Kumar, Balram Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Court No. - 7

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

¶9

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

¶10

Petition has been filed seeking mainly for following relief(s):-

¶11

"1.To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to revise and upgrade the Grade Pay of all the petitioners to Pay Band-IV, i.e., Rs. 37,400-67,000 with Grade Pay of Rs. 8,700, from the due date, and to grant all consequential service benefits, in terms of the judgment and order dated 23.09.2014 passed in Writ-A No. 237 of 2014, Ashok Kanojia vs. State of U.P. & Ors., and the judgment and order dated 19.07.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 2000222 of 2015, Kuldeep Kumar & 100 Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors., which have further been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1769 of 2024 decided on 13.01.2026; and further to direct payment of all consequential service benefits, including arrears, as per the undertaking letter dated 02.04.2024 issued by Opposite Party No. 2, in the interest of justice.

¶12

II. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioners for refixation of their pay and revision of their pension in the pay scale of Rs. 37,400-67,000 with Grade Pay of Rs. 8,700, as contained in Annexure No. 08 to the present writ petition in term of judgment

¶13

WRIA No. 2238 of 2026

¶14

¶15

and order dated 23.09.2014 passed in Writ-A No. 237 of 2014, Ashok Kanojia vs. State of U.P. & Ors., and the judgment and order dated 19.07.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 2000222 of 2015, Kuldeep Kumar & 100 Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors., which have further been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1769 of 2024 decided on 13.01.2026 and to grant all consequential service benefits as same grant in case of similarly situated along with admissible interest thereon, within such period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice."

¶16

Since considering petitioners' grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to petitioner to file fresh individual representations before competent authority who shall consider and decide the same, in light of judgments indicated in prayer clause, in case same are applicable, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of fresh representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶17

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

¶18

February 25, 2026 lakshman

¶19

(Manish Mathur,J.)

¶20

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

Devendra Kumar and 14 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Devendra Kumar and 14 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Engineering Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhinay @ Abhinav Chauhan @ Gulbadan Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Shailesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Evam Food Processing Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Shyam Babu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Dinesh Kumar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Kamlesh Yadav (Constable , PNO-89246101) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Shasan Lko. and 2 Others