Disposed¶13

Anand Raja Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2026WRIA/3669/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Post-retiral benefits; Pharmacist appointed 19.03.1991; superannuation 30.01.2025; retirement dues; liberty to file comprehensive representation; Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer, Banda; disposal without expressing opinion on merits; two-month decision timeline; transmission of papers to competent authority; WRIT - A No. 3669 of 2026; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Vikas Budhwar, J.; decided March 18, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation with self-attested copy of the writ petition before the third respondent, Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer, Banda, who is to decide the claim strictly in accordance with law within two months of presentation of the certified copy of the order, and to transmit the papers to the appropriate authority if the matter lies elsewhere.

Anand Raja Dwivedi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, appointed as Pharmacist on 19.03.1991 and superannuated on 30.01.2025, is entitled to post-retiral benefits which have not been accorded to him.

¶9

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with a self-attested copy of the writ petition before the third respondent (Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer, Banda), who shall decide the claim strictly in accordance with law within two months of presentation of the certified copy of the order; if the third respondent opines that the matter is to be decided by some other authority, the papers shall be transmitted to that authority.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The order was passed without seeking any response from the respondents and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court's view on the merits of the case.

¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 33, Vikas Budhwar, J.) disposed of Writ - A No. 3669 of 2026 filed by a Pharmacist appointed on 19.03.1991 who superannuated on 30.01.2025 and was not accorded post-retiral benefits. Without calling for a response from the respondents and expressly without going into the merits, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation with a self-attested copy of the writ petition before the third respondent, the Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer, Banda, who was directed to decide the claim strictly in accordance with law within two months of presentation of the certified copy of the order, with liberty to transmit the papers to another authority if the matter falls within its competence. Decision dated March 18, 2026.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3669 of 2026

¶3

Anand Raja Dwivedi

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ajay Kumar Pandey, Jaideep Tripathi : C.S.C.

¶6

Court No. - 33

¶7

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gaurav Singh, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents.

¶9

The case of the writ petitioner is that though he was appointed on the post of Pharmacist on 19.03.1991 and he superannuated on 30.01.2025 but he has not been accorded post retiral benefits.

¶10

Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider the claim.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the writ petitioner needs adjudication at the first instance by the third respondent, Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer, Banda.

¶12

To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same.

¶13

Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the selfattested copy of the writ petition before the third respondent, who shall on the receipt of the same within a period of two weeks, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. In case the third respondent is of the opinion that the matter is to be decided by some other authorities then the papers shall be transmitted to the same.

¶14

Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order may

¶15

WRIA No. 3669 of 2026

¶16

¶17

not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the case.

¶18

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off .

¶19

March 18, 2026 Ashu

¶20

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Raja Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Raja Dwivedi v. State of U.P. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Sharma and 5 Others vs Sri Parth Sarthi Sen Sharma Prin. Secy. Medical Health and Familywelfare Lko. and 7 Others

Amrendra Kant Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Asha vs Smt. Meenu Pathak and 2 Others

Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma vs the State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Soni Lata Prajapati vs State of U.P. and 4 Others