Formatting Practice Test 01 FREE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 1842 OF 2025

Rajesh Kumar, Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, Respondents

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents.

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner regarding release of service benefits which, according to him, have remained pending despite repeated requests.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed in accordance with the applicable rules and continued to discharge his duties without any adverse entry. It is submitted that after completion of the required period of service, certain consequential benefits became due to him. The petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the competent authority along with relevant documents, but no final decision has yet been communicated.

Learned Standing Counsel submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner involves examination of official records and that the competent authority may be permitted reasonable time to consider the representation in accordance with law. It is further submitted that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petition pending if an appropriate direction is issued for disposal of the representation.

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioner may appropriately be examined by the competent authority at the first instance. The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent number two to consider the representation of the petitioner, verify the relevant service records and pass a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date on which a certified copy of this order is produced before the authority.

It is made clear that while deciding the representation, the authority concerned shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner if such hearing is considered necessary and shall take into account all documents lawfully placed before it. If any amount is found payable after examination of the record, appropriate consequential action shall be taken without unnecessary delay.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to submit a fresh copy of the representation together with supporting documents and a copy of this order within two weeks. The authority shall acknowledge receipt of the same and proceed independently, without being influenced by any observation that may be understood as touching upon the merits of the dispute.

The parties are expected to cooperate with the proceedings and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournments. The authority shall ensure that the decision is communicated promptly to the petitioner at the address mentioned in the representation and preserved in the official record.

No order is made as to costs.

Order Date: 15 September 2025

Judge