Disposed

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

Allahabad HC15 Apr 2026WRIA/3845/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought increment, ACP and related benefits by counting pre-regularization service as Seasonal Collection Peon. Court disposed of the petition permitting a fresh representation to the Principal Secretary (Revenue), to be decided within eight weeks in light of cited judgments.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file fresh representation before opposite party no. 1, to be decided within eight weeks in light of the cited judgments, if applicable.

Lochan Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3845 of 2026

Lochan Prasad

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : S.P. Singh Somvanshi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 18

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard Mr. S. P. Singh Somvanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel for the opposite parties.

¶10

The petition has been filed seeking a direction to the authority concerned to provide annual increment, ACP along with other benefits by including the services rendered as Seasonal Collection Peon prior to regularization, in the light of the judgment and order dated 19.08.2006 passed in writ petition No. 4031 (S/S) of 2001 "Pratap Narain Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and others" judgment and order dated 07.05.2024 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6118 of 2024 by the Supreme Court in Anand Prakash Mani Tripathi v. State of U.P. and others , judgment and order dated 23.02.2023 passed in Writ-A No. 32819 of 2019, Daya Shankar Shukla v. State of U.P. and others , and judgment and order dated 15.03.2024 passed by this Court in Writ-A No. 7620 of

¶11

WRIA No. 3845 of 2026

¶12

¶13

2023, Jag Prasad Chaubey v. State of U.P. and others . A further prayer for grant of consequential benefits has also been sought.

¶14

Since consideration of the petitioner's grievance would entail factual aspects, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before opposite party no. 1, i.e., State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow, or any other competent authority, who shall consider and decide the same, in light of the aforesaid judgments, if applicable, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the fresh representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶15

With the aforesaid direction(s), the petition is finally disposed of.

¶16

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶17

April 15, 2026 R.C.

¶18

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dolly vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Shalini Devi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko and 4 Others

Society Rashtriya Udyog Ashram Higher School Thru. Manager/Secy. Rajendra Prasad Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Finance Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Anurag Mehrotra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 2 Others

Dr. Abhishek Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Health and Family Welfare U.P. Lko. and Another

Yogendra Singh Kateria vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and 3 Others