Disposed¶18

Ram Milan v. Her Excellency the Chancellor of the University of Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2026WRIA/620/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Direction to Chancellor of University of Lucknow (opposite party no. 1) to consider and decide petitioner's pending reference dated 31-12-2024 under S. 68 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act 1973 (seniority correction vis-a-vis Dr. (Prof.) Archana Singh; charge of Dean, Faculty of Commerce) within eight weeks; writ petition disposed of without entering into merits; no objection by respondents' counsel; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Writ - A No. 620 of 2026; Shree Prakash Singh, J.; decided January 22, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party no. 1 (Chancellor of the University of Lucknow) to consider and decide the petitioner's reference dated 31-12-2024 within eight weeks from production of a certified copy of the order; writ petition disposed of. ¶18

Ram Milan vs Her Excellency the Chancellor of the University of Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing opposite party no. 1 (Chancellor of the University of Lucknow) to consider and decide the petitioner's representation/reference dated 31-12-2024 under S. 68 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act 1973, pending for more than one year, within a stipulated period of time to be fixed by the Court.

¶13

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits of the case, and noting that learned counsel for the opposite parties had no objection, the Court directed the opposite party no. 1/Chancellor of the University of Lucknow to consider and decide the petitioner's reference dated 31-12-2024 within eight weeks from the date a certified copy of the order is produced before him.

¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ - A No. 620 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Shree Prakash Singh, J., decided January 22, 2026 — Mandamus for disposal of pending statutory reference. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus commanding the Chancellor of the University of Lucknow (opposite party no. 1) to consider and decide his representation/reference made under S. 68 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act 1973, instituted on 31-12-2024 and pending for over a year, by which he sought correction of his assigned seniority level so as to be declared senior to Dr. (Prof.) Archana Singh and to be given charge of Dean, Faculty of Commerce. Learned counsel for the opposite parties raised no objection. Without entering into the merits of the case, the Court directed the Chancellor to consider and decide the reference dated 31-12-2024 within eight weeks from the date a certified copy of the order was produced before him, and disposed of the writ petition.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 620 of 2026

Ram Milan

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Her Excellency The Chancellor Of The University Of Lko. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinay Misra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rajesh Tewari, Anurag Kumar Singh

¶8

Court No. - 18

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1, Sri Pankaj Patel,learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite parties no. 3 & 4 and perused the records.

¶11

The present writ petition has been filed with the following main relief:-

¶12

"(i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 1 to consider the representation/reference so made under section 68 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act 1973 for correcting the seniority level so assigned to the petitioner thereby declaring him senior to Dr. (Prof.) Archana Singh and provide to him the charge of Dean Faculty Of Commerce on the basis of seniority level so assigned, in the interest of justice."

¶13

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the reference has been instituted before Her Excellency, the Chancellor of the University of Lucknow on 31-12-2024 and that is pending since last more than one year. He submits that the interest of justice would be sub.served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the opposite party no. 1 to consider and decide the reference of the petitioner within the stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶14

WRIA No. 620 of 2026

¶15

¶16

Learned counsels appearing for the opposite parties have no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶17

Be that as it may, without entering into the merits of the case, the opposite party no.1/Chancellor of the University of Lucknow is directed to consider and decide the reference of the petitioner dated 31-12-2024 within the period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the same.

¶18

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

¶19

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶20

January 22, 2026 AKS

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Milan v. Her Excellency the Chancellor of the University of Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Milan v. Her Excellency the Chancellor of the University of 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Prakash Yadav vs U.O.I Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Telecommunications Ministry of Communications New Delhi and 2 Others

Ram Ujagar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Cooperative Lko. and 4 Others

Rakesh Chandra Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Krishi Vipran and Videsh Vyapar Anubhag Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Asare Dubey and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Mohd. Asif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civl Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Vikrant Suresh Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others