Raman Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Anubhag 4 Lko and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Raman Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Anubhag 4 Lko and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of by directing respondent no. 2 (Director, Local Bodies, Lucknow) to consider and decide the petitioner's claim for regularization in light of the judgment in Writ A No. 12603 of 2025 and Rule 21A(iii) of the 2003 Rules, within eight weeks of a certified copy of the order being produced; failing pendency of the claim, the petitioner may move a representation within one week.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose services were regularised only from 03.11.2015, is entitled to regularisation with effect from 26.08.2003 at par with similarly situated employees who received the benefit of Rule 21A(iii) of the 2003 Rules. +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 (Director, Local Bodies, Lucknow) to consider and decide the petitioner's claim for regularization in light of the judgment and order passed in Writ A No. 12603 of 2025 (Naresh Kumar) and Rule 21A(iii) of the 2003 Rules.

Ratio / Principle

The claim was directed to be decided within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of the disposal order is produced before respondent no. 2.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner's claim is not raised or not pending before the authority concerned, the petitioner shall raise it by moving a representation within a period of one week.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 18 - Shree Prakash Singh, J. Writ-A No. 379 of 2026 (Raman Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. thru Prin. Secy., Nagar Vikas Anubhag 4, Lko). The petitioner, whose services were regularised only with effect from 03.11.2015, sought mandamus for regularization from 26.08.2003 at par with similarly situated employees who had been given the benefit of Rule 21A(iii) of the U.P. Palika (Centralized) Services (Twenty First Amendment) Rules, 2003 ('Rule 2003'), counting of ad-hoc service from 07-03-1995 as qualifying service, and revision of service benefits as and when due. Without adjudicating entitlement afresh, and noting that certain other employees who approached the Court had been granted the same benefit (order in the case of Naresh Kumar, Writ A No. 12603 of 2025), the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent no. 2, Director, Local Bodies, Lucknow, to consider and decide the claim in light of that judgment and Rule 21A(iii) within eight weeks of a certified copy of the order being produced; if the claim was neither raised nor pending, the petitioner was to move a representation within one week. Judgment dated January 19, 2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 379 of 2026

Raman Kumar Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Anubhag 4 Lko And Another

Anubhag 4 Lko And Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sarvesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 18

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Saharsh Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the records.

The present writ petition has been filed with following prayers:-

"i. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to regularize the service of petitioner from 26/08/2003 like similarly situated persons as per rule 21 A (iii) of The Uttar Pradesh Palika (Centralized) Services (Twenty First Amendment) Rule, 2003.

ii. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of as mandamus commanding the opposite parties to Count the ad-hoc services of petitioner from 07-03-1995 qualifying service for the purpose of counting regular service at par with similarly situated persons.

iii. to, issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to revise the service benefits of the petitioner as and when the same falls due; at the appropriate time in service."

The contention put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the services of the petitioner has been regularised with effect from 03.11.2015, whereas, he is entitled for regularisation since 26.08.2003, from which date the similarly situated employees have been regularised by giving the benefit of Rule 21A(iii) of U.P. Palika Centralised Services, 21st amendment Rule 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rule 2003'). He further submits that interest

WRIA No. 379 of 2026

2

of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner within stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court.

Learned counsel for the respondents have no objections.

In view of the aforesaid submissions of counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the services of the petitioner has been regularised since 03.11.2015, whereas, his claim is with respect to the regularisation with effect from 26.08.2003. The fact remains that certain other employees who approached this Court have also been granted the benefit of the same. One order has been passed in the case of Naresh Kumar in Writ A No.12603 of 2025. Consequently, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of, directing the respondent no. 2/Director, Local Bodies, Lucknow, to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for regularization in light of the judgment and order passed in Writ A No. 12603 of 2025 as well as the provision of rule 21A(iii) of the Rules 2003, within period of eight weeks, from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

It is clarified that if the claim is not raised or is not pending before the authority concerned, the petitioner shall raise the claim by way of moving a representation, within period of one week, before the authority concerned.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

January 19, 2026 Ram Murti

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench