Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SHRAWAN KUMAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to decide the petitioner’s representation within twelve weeks, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the pension claim.

Summary

The petitioner, Shrawan Kumar Pandey, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State respondent to compute and pay his pension, final pension, gratuity, arrears and other retirement dues with interest, and also to consider a representation dated 23/07/2026. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the pending representation should be decided promptly, while the State’s standing counsel contended that the petition should be disposed and the respondent directed to decide the representation within a fixed period. The Court, without expressing any view on the merits of the pension claim, ordered that the petition be disposed of and directed the respondent to decide the representation expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks of the certified copy of the order, after giving a hearing. No substantive discussion on the computation of dues was made. The order was signed by Justice Manish Kumar Nigam on 18 September 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the State to compute and pay pension, gratuity and other retirement dues to the petitioner.
  • Whether the Court can direct the respondent to decide a pending representation within a specified time frame.

Subjects

  • pension
  • gratuity
  • arrears
  • mandamus
  • writ petition
  • administrative law
  • retirement dues
  • time-bound order

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                           WRIT - A No. - 14967 of 2026

Shrawan Kumar Pandey
                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others
                                                                  .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                        :   Manoj Kumar Mishra
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:

      "I. a writ order of direction in the Nature of mandamus commanding the
      respondent no. 2 to pay the computation of the pension, final pension,
      gratuity and arears, and other retiral dues to the petitioner in accordance
      with rules the actual date of payment with the interest @ 18% per annum
      within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

      II. a writ order or direction in the Nature of Mandamus Commanding the
      respondent no. 2 consider and decide the representation dated
      23/07/2026 (Annexure No. 9 to this writ petition) submitted by the
      petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, by passing reasoned and
      speaking order, within a time bound period as may be fixed by this
      Hon'ble Court."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is seeking
computation of the pension, final pension, gratuity and arears, and other
retiral   dues.    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 no. 2 to decide the representation/application of the petitioner
                                                                                            WRIA No. 14967 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    within a time frame as fixed by this Court.

                                    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 No. 2 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 18, 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.