Sony Devi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sony Devi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioners to submit a fresh representation before respondent no.4 within two weeks with a certified copy of the order; respondent no.4 directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks; writ petition disposed of finally without expressing any opinion on the merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed, by mandamus, to provide the petitioners duty on the post of Prantiya Rakshak Dal (P.R.D.) in their respective Blocks and pay their wages/salary regularly. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners were permitted to submit a separate fresh representation ventilating all their grievances before respondent no.4, along with a certified copy of the order, within two weeks.

Key takeaways

If such a representation is made, respondent no.4 is directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks.ratio¶¶14
The writ petition is disposed of finally in terms of the aforesaid observations.ratio¶¶18
Since the writ petition was decided on an ex parte version without seeking any response from the respondents, the order shall not be construed as an expression that the Court has gone into the merits, and the fourth respondent shall accord independent consideration strictly in accordance with law and the mandate of law holding the field.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Prantiya Rakshak Dal (P.R.D.) — writ petition seeking mandamus for provision of duty on the post of P.R.D. in the petitioners' respective Blocks and regular payment of wages/salary — counsel for the petitioners confined the prayer to a direction to respondent no.4 (Zila Yuva Kalyan Evam Prantiya Rakshak Dal, District Ghazipur) to decide the petitioners' representations — no instructions furnished by the learned Standing Counsel despite time granted on two occasions — petitioners permitted to submit a separate fresh representation before respondent no.4 within two weeks along with certified copy of the order — respondent no.4 directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks — writ petition disposed of finally; order passed on an ex parte version and not to be construed as an expression on the merits.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 4045 of 2026

Sony Devi And 3 Others

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 6

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Inspite of time granted at least on two occasions no instructions were provided by the learned Standing Counsel.

The petitioners have preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer :-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to provide duty to the petitioners on the post of Prantiya Rakshak Dal (P.R.D.) in their respective Block as earlier and provide them their wages/salary regularly in view of representations of petitioners dated 26.02.2026 (Annexure No.6), within the short span of time as granted by this Hon'ble Court."

Counsel for the petitioners confined his prayer and prayed that respondent no.4-Zila Yuva Kalyan Evam Prantiya Rakshak Dal, District Ghazipur be directed to pass order on their representations, copies of which are appended as annexure-6 to the writ petition.

It is argued by counsel for the petitioners that in this regard separate representations were already submitted by the petitioners before the respondent nos. 2 & 4 but no decision has been taken in the matter.

In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is permitted to submit separate fresh representation ventilating all their grievances before the respondent no.4 along-with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no.4 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a

WRIA No. 4045 of 2026

2

further period of four weeks.

With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of finally.

Since the writ petition has been decided on an exparte version without seeking any response from the respondents, thus passing of the order today may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the matter and the fourth respondent shall accord independent consideration strictly in accordance with law and the mandate of law holding the field.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

May 6, 2026 Pramod Tripathi

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad