Allahabad High Court
SHAMBHU NATH AND 7 OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition without addressing the merits, directing the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the General Manager, who must decide it within three months.
Summary
The petitioners, Shambhu Nath and seven others, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to pay interest at 7% on their Privileged Leave Enchashment (PLE) amounts for periods of five and seven years, and to decide several representations filed by them within a specified time frame. The respondents contended that the grievance should be addressed by the General Manager, who is respondent No.3, and raised no objection to a direction for expeditious disposal of a fresh representation. The Court, finding no merit in continuing the petition, ordered the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the General Manager within three weeks, attaching a certified copy of the order, and directed the General Manager to decide the matter within three months, provided no legal impediment exists. No substantive observation on the merits was made. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without any order on the substantive reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court should direct payment of interest on the Privileged Leave Enchashment amount.
- Whether the Court should compel the respondents to decide the pending representations within a stipulated period.
- Whether the petition can be dismissed and the petitioners directed to approach the administrative authority (General Manager) for redress.
Subjects
- mandamus
- privileged leave encashment
- interest
- administrative law
- writ petition
- representation
- disposal without merits
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14099 of 2026
Shambhu Nath And 7 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar, Brij Narayan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Dinesh Kumar Rai, Sudarshan
Singh
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Mr. Pranjal Mehrotra, learned Advocate has filed memo of appearance on
behalf of the respondents No. 2 and 3 today in Court, which is taken on
record. Office is directed to proceed accordingly and print his name as
learned counsel for the respondents in the cause list, whenever the case is
listed next.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sudarshan Singh, learned
counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr. Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for
respondents no.2 and 3.
3. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:
"I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing
the respondent authorities to pay interest on the Privileged Leave
Enchashment (PLE) amount, for the period of 5 and 7 years in favour of
the petitioners at the rate of 7% interesst.
II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing
the respondent authorities to decide the representations of the petitioners
both dated 14.08.2026, 15.5.2026, 15.5.2026, 15.5.2026, 15.5.2026,
11.5.20206, 11.5.2026, 14.8.2026 within specified time frame period as
may be determined by this Hon'ble Court under the facts and
circumstances of the case "
4. Mr. Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for contesting respondents no. 2
and 3 has contended that the grievance of the petitioners can be more
appropriately redressed by the General Manager (respondent no.3), and he
has no objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the fresh
WRIA No. 14099 of 2026
2
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
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 before the General Manager (respondent no. 3) to
ventilate 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, 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, if there is
no any other legal impediment.
6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition stands disposed of.
September 9, 2026
VS
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR BARATAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…