Disposed¶15

Ramraj Singh and Another v. Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2026WRIA/3390/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gratuity; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972; non-payment after superannuation (retirement 30.06.2018 and 31.03.2019); Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad employees; representation to be decided in accordance with law within six weeks in light of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Writ-C No. 24841 of 2016 (decided 19.07.2016); writ petition disposed of without examining merits; WRIT - A No. 3390 of 2026; decided April 7, 2026 by Rajeev Singh, J.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to submit a representation to respondent no. 1 within two weeks; respondent no. 1 to consider and decide it in accordance with law within six weeks, considering the judgment in Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti (supra). ¶15

Ramraj Singh and Another vs Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3390 of 2026

¶3

Ramraj Singh And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. And 2 Others

¶7

o. n ers	.....Respo	ndent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Rajiv Srivastava, Avadhesh Singh : Surendra Kumar Singh	Kumar

¶8

Court No. - 17

¶9

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶10

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Rohit Mishra, Advocate on behalf of the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 is taken on record.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rohit Mishra, learned counsel for respondent nos.1, 2 & 3.

¶12

With the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided.

¶13

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that despite the petitioners having retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2018 and 31.03.2019, the gratuity as per the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 has not been paid to the petitioners.

¶14

It is contended that this aspect of the matter has already been considered by this Court in the case of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Vs. Appellate Authority and Ors . passed in Writ-C No. 24841 of 2016 decided on 19.07.2016, a copy of which is annexure 12 to the writ petition.

¶15

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to submit a representation to the respondent no. 1 within two weeks from today. In case, such a representation is made then the respondent no. 1 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of next six weeks considering the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti (supra) .

¶16

WRIA No. 3390 of 2026

¶17

¶18

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.

¶19

April 7, 2026

¶20

Arpan

¶21

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶22

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

Ramraj Singh and Another v. Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramraj Singh and Another v. Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar Trivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Krishi Vipran and Videsh Vyapar Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Agri. Marketing and Foreign Trade Lko. and 2 Others

Jamuna Devi @ Yamuna Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

Niraj Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajesh Bothra vs Central Bureau of Investigation Thru. SP and Head of Branch Lko

Smt. Maheshwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.