Allahabad High Court
KRISHNA CHANDversusREGIONAL MANAGER RAJYA BHANDARAN AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of without merits, with a direction to the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the Regional Manager.
Summary
The petitioner, Krishna Chand, filed a writ petition seeking regularisation of his services with the U.P. State Warehousing Corporation. The respondents argued that the matter required factual determination by the competent authority and that the petitioner's claim should be examined by the Regional Manager, not the court. The court noted that the petition did not require judicial intervention and that the appropriate forum was the Regional Manager. Accordingly, the court disposed of the writ petition without addressing its merits, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Regional Manager within three weeks, and to have it decided within three months. The order was issued by Justice Dinesh Pathak on 9 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition for regularisation of services or direct the petitioner to approach the Regional Manager of the U.P. State Warehousing Corporation for a fresh representation.
Subjects
- regularisation of services
- administrative law
- public service
- writ petition
- U.P. State Warehousing Corporation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14160 of 2026
Krishna Chand
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Regional Manager Rajya Bhandaran And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hari Narayan Singh, Kanchan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bal Mukund Singh
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard Ms. Kanchan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bal
Mukund Singh, learned counsel appearing for the U.P. State Warehousing
Corporation (respondent nos. 1 and 2).
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that their representation seeking
regularization of his services has not been decided till date.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter requires
factual determination, as per the applicable law, by the competent authority
in the first instance, and that the claim of the petitioner needs to be
ascertained as to whether he was appointed by the Corporation on its rolls or
was contractual employees engaged through a contractor. However, he fairly
contends that the claim of the petitioner for regularization is liable to be
considered and decided by the Regional Manager of the U.P. State
Warehousing Corporation (respondent no. 1), and he has no objection if a
direction is issued for expeditious disposal of a fresh representation to be
moved by the present petitioner within such stipulated period, as may be
directed by this Court.
4. 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 petitioner to move a
fresh representation before the Regional Manager of the U.P. State
Warehousing Corporation (respondent no. 1) to ventilate his grievance, as
raised in this petition, within a period of three weeks from today, along with
WRIA No. 14160 of 2026
2
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.
5. With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition is disposed of.
September 9, 2026
VS
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR BARATAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…