Allahabad High Court
VINOD KUMAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The writ petition is disposed, with liberty to the petitioners to move a fresh representation before the District Administrative Committee, and no mandamus is issued.
Summary
Petitioners, former employees, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to pay arrears of salary from June 2003 to their retirement and to compel the District Administrative Committee (DAC) to decide their representation. The respondents argued that the grievance should be addressed by the DAC and did not oppose a direction for a fresh representation. The High Court held that the petition does not warrant a mandamus and that the appropriate forum is the DAC. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition without addressing its merits, granting the petitioners liberty to file a fresh representation within three weeks and directing the DAC to decide it within three months. The petition is thereby finally disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing payment of arrears of salary to the petitioners.
- Whether the Court can compel the District Administrative Committee to decide the representation filed by the petitioners.
- Whether the writ petition should be dismissed and the petitioners directed to approach the appropriate administrative forum.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- arrears of salary
- administrative law
- District Administrative Committee
- representation
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 13945 of 2026
Vinod Kumar And 4 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rama Shanker Yadav, Suman Kumar
Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Satyam Singh
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record on Board.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-
"a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents to pay the arrear of salary from June 2003
uptill date of retirement of the petitioners, along with interest, to the
petitioners, forthwith.
b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the representation submitted
by the petitioners, before him, on different dates, forthwith."
3. The petitioner has raised grievance regarding non-payment of arrears of
salary.
4. Shri Satyam Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents
2 & 3 has contended that the grievance of the petitioners qua non-
payment of arrears of salary, as raised in the instant writ petition, can be
more appropriately redressed by the District Administrative Committee (
respondent no.2) and that he has no objection if a direction is issued for
expeditious disposal of a fresh representation, to be moved by the present
petitioners, within such stipulated period, as may be directed by this
Court.
5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
WRIA No. 13945 of 2026
2
keeping this matter pending; therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation
on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioners to move a
fresh representation with respect to their grievances, as raised in this
petition, within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified
copy of this order and a self attested copy of the instant writ petition before
the respondent no.2, who, in turn, shall consider and decide the same in
accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three
months from the date of production of the same.
6. With the aforesaid direction, instant writ petition stands finally
disposed of.
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
September 8, 2026
VR
Digitally signed by :-
VIBHA RATAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…