Ramchandra Vishwakarma and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2026WRIA/2728/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; WRIT - A No. 2728 of 2026; Ramchandra Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.; Garima Prashad, J.; Court No. 52; State of U.P. v. Neeraj Kumar Pandey; SLP (C) No. 18516 of 2019; order dated 29.11.2025; fence-sitters; 31.12.2019 cut-off; para 16; appointment; seniority; arrears of salary; least marks candidate; adjournment; listed fresh 18.3.2026.

What did the court decide?

Matter adjourned: two weeks' time granted to learned counsel for the petitioners to find out if any further order of modification or clarification has been issued in State of U.P. v. Neeraj Kumar Pandey; case to be put up as fresh on 18.3.2026. No adjudication on merits. ¶¶15

Ramchandra Vishwakarma and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 2728 of 2026

¶3

Ramchandra Vishwakarma And 4 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Yadav, Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kushmondeya Shahi

¶9

Court No. - 52

¶10

HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Kushmondeya Shahi, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the leading case of State of U.P. vs. Neeraj Kumar Pandey & Ors. dated 29.11.2025, SLP (C) No. 18516 of 2019 wherein it has been held that;

¶13

"...Those of the candidates who are found to have secured marks more than the candidate who has been appointed with the least number of marks shall be considered and offered appointment, in accordance with law, with the clear stipulation that such candidate shall not be entitled to seniority as well as arrears of salary..."

¶14

However, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 pointed out that the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court passed in State of U.P. vs. Neeraj Kumar Pandey & Ors. will not apply to the case of the petitioners, since in para no.16 of the said judgment, it has been made clear that only those candidates who have approached this Court with writ petitions/interlocutory applications seeking intervention, impleadment, etc. any time before 31.12.2019 shall be entitled to the benefit of that order and relief was declined to the others on the ground that they were fence-sitters.

¶15

Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioners admitted that the petitioners had not approached the Supreme Court. However, he seeks and granted two week's time to find out if any further order of modification or clarification has been issued in the aforesaid matter.

¶16

WRIA No. 2728 of 2026

¶17

¶18

Put up as fresh on 18.3.2026.

¶19

(Garima Prashad,J.)

¶20

February 24, 2026 Sachin Mishra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH MEHTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramchandra Vishwakarma and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramchandra Vishwakarma and 4 Others 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Girish Chand Tyagi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt Kunj Lata Tripathi vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Anil Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jitendra Kumar @ Jitnedra Kumar Bhaskar vs State of U.P. and Another

Shalini Dwivedi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others