Allahabad High Court
MAISAR JAHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within twelve weeks, without issuing a mandamus, and disposed of the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Maisar Jaha, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and another respondent to release a family pension. The petitioner had already submitted a representation on 22 June 2026 to the second respondent regarding the same grievance. The court noted that since the representation was pending, issuing a mandamus would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the court directed the second respondent to consider and decide the representation within twelve weeks, after providing a hearing to all parties. The court clarified that it did not examine the merits of the pension claim and disposed of the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the release of the family pension or merely direct the respondent to consider the pending representation.
Subjects
- family pension
- mandamus
- writ petition
- representation
- High Court of Allahabad
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15554 of 2026
Maisar Jaha
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sushant Misra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed for following relief:-
"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents to release the family pension in favour of the petitioner."
2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner has already moved
a representation in this regard on 22.06.2026 before respondent No. 2.
3. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that as petitioner has already represented,
no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and it would be
appropriate that respondent No. 2 be directed to consider the grievance of the
petitioner in accordance with law.
3. In view of these facts, respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the
representation dated 22.06.2026 of the petitioner in accordance with law, after
providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties, expeditiously, preferably
within a period of twelve weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this
order.
4. It is made clear that this court has not examined the matter on merits and the order
shall be passed strictly in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
September 24, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…