Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

NARAYAN SINGHversusPRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYATI RAJYA, UTTAR PRADESH GOVERNMENT AND 2 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition without merits, directing the petitioner to approach the Executive Officer with a fresh representation.

Summary

The petitioner, Narayan Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to grant him pension gratuity and other retiral benefits and to decide his representation dated 20‑05‑2026 within a stipulated time. The State respondent argued that the grievance should be addressed by the Executive Officer (respondent No.3) and had no objection to a court‑directed timeline for a fresh representation. The Court held that keeping the petition pending would serve no useful purpose and therefore disposed of it without addressing the merits. It directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Executive Officer within three weeks, attaching the order and a copy of the petition, and instructed the officer to decide it within three months, subject to any legal impediment. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue administrative remedy.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate forum for redressing the petitioner's grievance regarding pension gratuity and retiral benefits?
  • Can the High Court issue a mandamus directing the respondents to grant pension benefits and decide a representation within a specified time?

Subjects

  • pension
  • gratuity
  • retiral benefits
  • mandamus
  • writ petition
  • administrative remedy
  • High Court

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT - A No. - 16151 of 2026

Narayan Singh
                                                                      .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus

Principal Secretary Panchayati Rajya, Uttar
Pradesh Government And 2 Others                                     .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)          : Satyendra Narayan                Singh,     Tarun
                                     Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s)          : C.S.C.

Court No. - 32
                      HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents and perused the record on Board.

2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following
reliefs:

     "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct
     the respondents to grant Pension gratuity and other retiral Benefits to
     the petitioner within the time as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court.


     (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct
     the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 20.5.2026 of the
     petitioner within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.


     (c) Issue any suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may
     deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the instant case."

3. Learned counsel appearing for the State-respondent no. 1 has
contended that the grievance of the present petitioner regarding retiral
benefits, as raised in the instant writ petition, can be more appropriately
redressed by the Executive Officer (respondent no.3) 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.
                                                                                             WRIA No. 16151 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    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 Executive Officer (respondent
                                    no. 3) 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 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.



                                                                                              (Dinesh Pathak,J.)
                                    October 1, 2026
                                    Neetu




Digitally signed by :-
NEETU SINGH
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.