Dharmendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Dharmendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure No. 3) expeditiously in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within six weeks from the date a copy of the order is produced before him, and to communicate the decision to the petitioner; merits of the termination challenge not entered into.

Issue for consideration

Whether the oral order of termination dated 01.04.2025 terminating the petitioner's services on the Class IV post is liable to be set aside/quashed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure No. 3) expeditiously in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The representation must be decided by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of the order is produced before respondent No. 2, and the decision communicated to the petitioner.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 7, Manish Mathur, J., 16 March 2026, WRIT - A No. - 2796 of 2026: Petitioner Dharmendra Singh, appointed in July 2008 as a Daily Wager on a Group D Class IV post (Watcher) in Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, North Kheri, Buffer Zone, Dhaurarha Range, Lakhimpur Kheri, served until 31.03.2025. On 01.04.2025, on reporting at Social Forestry Division, Mishrikh Range, Sitapur, he was not allowed to discharge duties or mark attendance, and no work has been taken from him since. He challenged the oral order of termination dated 01.04.2025 and relied on his representation dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure No. 3), which was pending undecided. Without entering into the merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondent No. 2 to decide the representation expeditiously in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within six weeks of production of a copy of the order, and to communicate the decision to the petitioner. No statute or precedent is cited in the judgment.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 2796 of 2026

Dharmendra Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. And Another	Lko. .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Tushar Bhushan
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

Court No. - 7

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

Heard Mr. Tushar Bhushan, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to State-respondents to set aside/quash the oral order of termination dated 01.04.2025, terminating the services of the petitioner on Class IV post.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner was appointed in July, 2008 as a Daily Wager on Group D Class IV post, in Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, North Kheri, Buffer Zone, Dhaurarha Range, Lakhimpur Kheri and thereafter from July, 2008 till 31.03.2025, the petitioner discharged his duties on the post of Watcher. It has further been submitted that when the petitioner reported for his duty on 01.04.2025 in Social Forestry Division, Mishrikh Range, Sitapur he was not allowed and permitted to discharge his duties and was not allowed to mark his attendance in the attendance register.

He further submits that no work is being taken from the petitioner since 01.04.2025 till date, and the petitioner is not being allowed to discharge his duties on Class IV post, even though the petitioner is always willing and ready to discharge his duties on his post but no work is being taken from the petitioner on Class IV.

WRIA No. 2796 of 2026

2

In this regard, it has been submitted that petitioner has given a representation dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure No. 3) which is pending consideration and has not been decided so far.

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in a time bound manner.

Learned Standing Counsel does not object if a direction is issued to respondents for expeditious disposal of the representation preferred by the petitioner.

Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) expeditiously in accordance with law, by a speaking and reasoned order, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him and communicate the decision to the petitioner.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

March 16, 2026

kvg/-

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