Disposed¶18

Naushad Ahmad Jalali v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Service law – Pension – Reduction of pension after retirement

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2026WRIA/4995/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Writ - A No. 4995 of 2026, Prakash Padia J., 09.04.2026 — pension reduction order (Rs.62,200/- for 01.01.2006–01.07.2020) passed without hearing in violation of earlier judgment dated 03.11.2025 held illegal; personal affidavit sought from Commissioner of Police, Kanpur Nagar on contempt; natural justice; non-compliance with court directions.

What did the court decide?

Interim directions issued: Respondent No.3 (Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar) to file personal affidavit within three weeks showing cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated; matter listed on 06.05.2026. ¶18

Naushad Ahmad Jalali vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 4995 of 2026

Naushad Ahmad Jalali

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Archana Singh, Bramh Narayan Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 6

¶8

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

¶9

After the retirement of the petitioner, the respondent no.3 passed an order by which the pension of the petitioner has been reduced as Rs.62,200/- for the period 01.01.2006 till 01.07.2020.

¶10

Aggrieved against the aforesaid, Writ A No. 16116 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner before this Court which was finally dispose of vide judgment and order dated 03.11.2025.

¶11

It is argued that pursuant to the aforesaid, order impugned has been passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Head Quarters, Commissionerate, Kanpur Nagar vide order dated December ...., 2025 being Letter No.Na-712/2024.

¶12

It is unfortunate that though the order was passed from the office of the Commissioner of Police, Kanpur Nagar but even the date of the order has not been mentioned in the order impugned.

¶13

Apart from the same, order impugned has been passed pursuant to the direction given by this Court dated 03.11.2025 in which a specific direction was given to the petitioner to furnish the documents and thereafter date for hearing was also directed to be fixed but in the present case as argued by the counsel for the petitioner, no opportunity of hearing whatsoever has been provided by the respondents while passing the aforesaid order.

¶14

In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that order

¶15

WRIA No. 4995 of 2026

¶16

¶17

impugned passed not only illegal but also in cross violation of directions given by this Court dated 03.11.2025, reference of which has already been made in the order impugned.

¶18

In this view of the matter, Respondent No.3 namely Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar is directed to file his personal affidavit within a period of three weeks from today stating therein that why the contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him.

¶19

List this matter on 06.05.2026.

¶20

The matter will be taken up after recess.

¶21

(Prakash Padia,J.)

¶22

April 9, 2026

¶23

Swati

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naushad Ahmad Jalali v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naushad Ahmad Jalali 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Laxmi Devi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sanjay Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sony Devi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vishal Singh vs the State of Up and 2 Others

Nandlal Singh vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

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