Allahabad High Court
SHANKER SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The High Court disposed of the writ petition without merits, directing the petitioner to seek relief from the Nagar Aayukt.
Summary
Shanker Singh filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to grant him pension benefits. The petition was opposed by the respondents, who argued that the grievance should be addressed by the Nagar Aayukt. The court found that continuing the writ would not serve any useful purpose and ordered the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Nagar Aayukt within three weeks, attaching a certified copy of the order. The Nagar Aayukt was directed to decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within three months. No observations were made on the merits of the pension claim, and the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate forum for redressing the petitioner's grievance regarding non-payment of pension?
- Can the High Court dismiss a writ petition and direct the petitioner to approach an administrative authority without deciding the merits?
Subjects
- pension
- writ petition
- mandamus
- administrative law
- jurisdiction
- Nagar Aayukt
- fresh representation
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15315 of 2026
Shanker Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Daya Shanker Pandey, Prachi Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Raghuvansh Misra
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondent No. 1, learned counsel for the respondents No.
2, 3 and 4 and perused the record.
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 directing
and commanding the respondent authority to provide the benefit of
pension to the petitioner.
II. Issue a writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. Sri Shivang, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Raghuvansh Mishra,
learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 has contended that
the grievance of the present petitioner regarding non-payment of retiral dues
can be more appropriately redressed by Nagar Aayukt (respondent nos. 4)
and that he has no objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal
of the 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 Nagar Aayukt (respondent no. 4) to ventilate
his 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
WRIA No. 15315 of 2026
2
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 other legal
impediment.
5. With the aforesaid directions and observations, present writ petition stands
disposed of.
September 23, 2026
vinay
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…