Disposed¶17

Ram Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2026WRIA/3722/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Minimum wages; daily-wage/work-charged employees; mandamus; consideration of representations; direction to respondent no. 4 to decide within eight weeks by reasoned and speaking order; disposal without merits; reference to WRIT A No. 10663 of 2024 (Somveer Singh); Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; Writ - A No. 3722 of 2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to submit fresh individual representations before respondent no. 4 within two weeks, with a direction to respondent no. 4 to consider and decide the same within a further period of eight weeks by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law; petition disposed of without entering into the merits. ¶17

Ram Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, claiming service as daily-wage/work-charged employees, are entitled to payment of minimum wages, and whether their representations in that regard ought to be considered and decided by the authorities.

¶10

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the writ petition without entering into the merits of the case.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners Ram Singh, Kunwar Dinesh Singh and Brijesh Singh are permitted to submit fresh representations individually before respondent no. 4 within a period of two weeks.

¶16

Key takeaways

If such representations are submitted, respondent no. 4 shall consider and decide them within a further period of eight weeks by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), WRIT - A No. - 3722 of 2026, Ram Singh, Kunwar Dinesh Singh and Brijesh Singh v. State of U.P. through Secretary, Horticulture, Lucknow and 3 others, decided April 16, 2026, per Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. Daily-wage/work-charged employees sought mandamus for consideration of their representations for payment of minimum wages, placing reliance on WRIT A No. 10663 of 2024, Somveer Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. After arguing for some time, counsel confined the prayer to submission of fresh individual representations. Without entering into the merits, the Court permitted the petitioners to submit fresh representations individually before respondent no. 4 within two weeks, to be considered and decided by respondent no. 4 within a further eight weeks by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3722 of 2026

¶3

Ram Singh And 2 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Hor Others	ticulture Lko.	And 3	.....	Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Praveen Shukla, : C.S.C.	Kumar Dr. Amit	Singh, Asthana	Amit Kumar

¶6

Court No. - 18

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶9

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner prays for the following main reliefs:-

¶10

"i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to consider the petitioner representations for payment of minimum wages in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Court in WRIT A No. 10663 of 2024 Somveer Singh and 4 Others Vs. State of Up & others which has categorically held that service rendered as daily-wage/work-charged employee is liable to be pay minimum wages.

¶11

ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the petitioners the minimum wages in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Court in WRIT A No. 10663 of 2024 Somveer Singh and 4 Others Vs. State of Up & others."

¶12

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it would suffice if the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation individually raising their grievances before respondent no. 4, with a direction to decide the same within a stipulated period.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners.

¶14

WRIA No. 3722 of 2026

¶15

¶16

Considering the aforesaid and without entering into the merits of the case, the petitioners namely Ram Singh, Kunwar Dinesh Singh and Brijesh Singh are permitted to submit a fresh representation individually before respondent no. 4 within a period of two weeks from today. In case such a representations are submitted, the same shall be considered and decided by respondent no. 4 within a further period of eight weeks, by means of a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of.

¶18

April 16, 2026 Vinay/-

¶19

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶20

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

Ram Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 3 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lochan Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Shivani Chaurasia vs Kendriya Vidyalya Sangathan Thru. Commissioner New Delhi and 2 Others

Vijay Kumar Chaudhary vs State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Lucknow and 4 Others

Amitesh Rawat (Head Constable , PNO-112766418) vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Pushpraj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Uma Shankar Yadav (PNO-982320224) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Govt. Lko. and 3 Others