Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

KRISHNANAND UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to decide the pending representation/application within twelve weeks, without expressing any opinion on the merits.

Summary

The petitioner, Krishnanand Upadhyay, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents to compute his combined military and civil service tenure and fix his pay and seniority as per Government Orders dated 26‑08‑1977 and 26‑03‑1980 and Civil Service Regulation 526, including all consequential benefits. The petitioner also requested that promotional benefits be extended after inclusion of his military service. The petitioner had a pending representation/application before the respondent authority on the same matter. The State counsel argued that the petition should not be kept pending and the respondent should be directed to decide the representation within a fixed time. The Court, without expressing any view on the merits, disposed of the petition and ordered the respondent authority to decide the pending representation/application expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks of the certified copy of the order, after giving a hearing to the parties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court should issue a mandamus directing the respondents to compute the petitioner's combined service tenure, fix his pay and seniority, and extend promotional benefits, or merely direct the respondent authority to decide the pending representation/application within a specified time.

Subjects

  • military service
  • civil service
  • pay fixation
  • seniority
  • mandamus
  • writ petition
  • administrative law

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                           WRIT - A No. - 14840 of 2026

Krishnanand Upadhyay
                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
                                                                .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             : Bhim Sen Pandey, Kartikey Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)             : C.S.C.

Court No. - 33
                 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
State and perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

     "Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
     respondents to compute the petitioner's 18 years, 7 month and and 16
     days Military Service along with present Civil Service and make a
     fixation of pay as provided under G.O. dated 26.08.1977 and 26.03.1980
     and Civil Service Regulation 526 awarding all the consequential benefits.

     Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
     respondents to ascertain the seniority and extend the promotional benefits
     after inclusion of Military Service."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is seeking
fixation of pay as provided under G.O. dated 26.08.1977 and 26.03.1980 and
Civil Service Regulation 526 as well as all the consequential benefits . In
this regard, the petitioner has moved a representation/application which is
pending consideration.

4. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that no useful purpose would be
served in keeping this petition pending and it would be appropriate to direct
the respondent authority to decide the representation/application of the
petitioner within a time frame as fixed by this Court.
                                                                                            WRIA No. 14840 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing
                                    any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of
                                    finally with a direction to respondent authority to consider and decide the
                                    aforementioned representation/application of the petitioner, in accordance
                                    with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the
                                    date of production of a certified copy of this order after giving opportunity
                                    of hearing to the parties concerned provided that there is no other legal
                                    impediment.



                                                                                     (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    Ved Prakash




Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.