Allahabad High Court
SHAFQAT ALIversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The petition is dismissed without adjudicating the merits, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Municipal Commissioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Shafqat Ali, a senior clerk/accountant in the Nazul Department, retired on 30 April 2026 and alleged that his salary had not been paid since 16 January 2026 and that his retirement benefits, including pension and gratuity, remained unpaid. He filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the respondents to release his salary, pension, and all other retiral benefits, and to decide a representation dated 7 May 2026. The respondents argued that the grievance should be addressed by the Municipal Commissioner and did not oppose a direction for the petitioner to file a fresh representation. The Court observed that keeping the petition pending would serve no useful purpose and chose to dispose of the writ without addressing the merits. It granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh representation before the Municipal Commissioner within three weeks, attaching a certified copy of the order, and directed the Commissioner to decide the matter within three months. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and the matter was remitted to the appropriate administrative authority.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can grant mandamus directing the release of the petitioner's salary and retirement benefits
- Whether the grievance should be redressed by the Municipal Commissioner rather than by the Court
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- salary arrears
- pension
- retirement benefits
- administrative law
- jurisdiction
- municipal commissioner
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14130 of 2026
Shafqat Ali
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Singh, Santosh Kumar
Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vijay Bahadur Maurya
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard Ms Farheen, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Amit Kumar
Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents and perused the record on board.
2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondents authorities to release the salary as well as pension of the
petitioner.
(ii) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondents authorities to release all retiral benefits including gratuity,
G.P.F., leave encashment, commuted pension and other emoluments.
(iii) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondents to pay the regular pension to the petitioner since May 2026,
and further direct the respondent no. 2 and 4 to decide the representation of the
petitioner dated 7.5.2026 pending before him and to pay the regular pension to the
petitioner since May 2026 continuously."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner attained the
age of superannuation on 30.04.2026 while working as Senior
Clerk/Accountant in Nazul Department. However, he has not been paid
salary since 16.01.2026 and retiral dues after attaining the age of
superannuation. Despite repeated representations, the respondents have not
released the arrears of salary and the terminal dues.
4. Sri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
No. 2 to 4 has contended that the grievance of the present petitioner
WRIA No. 14130 of 2026
2
regarding non-payment of arrears of salary and retiral dues can be more
appropriately redressed by the Municipal Commissioner (respondent No. 2),
and he has no objection, in case, a direction is issued for expeditious
disposal of a fresh representation to be moved by the petitioner 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 petitioner to move a fresh
representation before the Municipal Commissioner (respondent No. 2), to
ventilate his grievance, as averred in the present writ petition, within a
period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order
and a self attested copy of the present writ petition, and, in turn, he shall
consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously,
preferably, within a period of three months from the date of production of
such representation.
6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of.
September 9, 2026
vinay
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…