Allahabad High Court
GEETAM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court held that the petition could not be entertained on its merits and directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation, which the respondent must decide within two months.
Summary
The petitioner, a former Assistant Teacher, retired on 31 March 2022 and alleges that salary arrears for the period 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2022 remain unpaid. She filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Basic Education Officer (respondent No.2) to release the arrears and to consider a representation dated 17 September 2026. The State, through the Additional Chief Standing Counsel, pointed out an unexplained four‑year delay in filing the petition and suggested that a fresh representation be filed. The Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, dismissed the petition and ordered the petitioner to make a fresh representation, supported by relevant documents, within three weeks. The respondent was directed to decide the fresh representation within two months, issuing a reasoned order after giving a hearing. The petition was therefore disposed of without adjudicating the claim for salary arrears.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of salary arrears for the period January to March 2022.
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the respondent to release the arrears and consider the representation.
- Whether the petition is maintainable despite a four‑year delay in filing.
Subjects
- salary arrears
- mandamus
- public servant
- retirement
- representation
- delay
- high court
- administrative law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 16145 of 2026
Geetam Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Somveer
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Anuradha Sundaram,
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and
perused the record.
The present writ petition has been filed inter-alia for the following
reliefs:-
"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the
respondent no.2 to release and pay the arrears of salary due and payable to the petitioner for the period
from 01.01.2022 to 31.03.2022, in accordance with law, within such period as may be fixed by this
Hon'ble Court;
(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding and directing
Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider and decide the representation dated 17.09.2026 submitted by the
petitioner, in accordance with law, within a time-bound period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;
(III) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of writ of and directing the mandamus commanding
respondent no.2 & 3 to decide the representation dated 17.09.2026 of the petitioner (Annexure No.4 to the
writ petition);
(IV) Issue any suitable writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under
the facts and circumstances of the case..
(V) Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner retired on
31.03.2022 from the post of Assistant Teacher, but salary for the period from
01.01.2022 to 31.03.2022 has not been paid to the petitioner. A
representation in this regard has been moved before respondent nos. 2 and 3,
but nothing has been done till date. Therefore, a direction may be issued to
WRIA No. 16145 of 2026
2
decide the same in accordance with law.
Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that this petition has
been filed after an unexplained delay of nearly four years. However, in case
a fresh representation along with relevant documents is submitted before
respondent no. 2, an appropriate order shall be passed after hearing all
concerned.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the
petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the
petitioner may make fresh representation, ventilating all his grievances,
supported by such documents, as may be advised, before the respondent
no.2; District Basic Education Officer, District Etah, within three weeks
from today along with a certified copy of this order. On such
representation being made, respondent no.2 shall make all endeavours to
consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means
of a reasoned and speaking order, after giving proper opportunity of
hearing to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably
within a period of two months from the date of production of certified
copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
October 1, 2026
Jitendra/-
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…