Allahabad High Court
VIJAY PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The Court held that the relief sought could not be granted and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Pal Singh, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the respondents to grant him post‑retirement benefits, assured career progression, and to refund an amount recovered between 1 April 2001 and 29 September 2003. The petitioner later clarified that the refund prayer pertained to the amount recovered under an order dated 19 May 2007 issued by the District Development Officer, Rampur. The petition did not allege that the 2007 order had ever been challenged before any authority, and the order remained in force. The Court observed that without a challenge to the existing order, the petitioner could not be granted a refund or mandamus for the benefits claimed. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, noting that any entitlement to post‑retirement dues would be considered separately by the appropriate authority.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to mandamus directing the respondents to provide post‑retirement benefits and assured career progression.
- Whether the petitioner can be ordered to refund the amount recovered under the 19 May 2007 order.
- Whether the existence of an unchallenged order precludes the Court from granting the relief sought.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- post‑retirement benefits
- refund
- High Court of Allahabad
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 5509 of 2026
Vijay Pal Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ghazala Bano Quadri
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayers:-
"I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing /
commanding the respondent No. 2 and 3 to provide the retiral benefits as
well as benefit of assured career progression to the petitioner along with
the interest within stipulated period.
II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondent no. 3 to refund / return the recovered amount which is from
01.04.2021 to 29.09.2003."
2. It is argued that correct date is 01.04.2001 and not 01.04.2021 as
contained in the prayer no. 2.
3. After some arguments, counsel for the petitioner confined her prayer
insofar as the prayer n.2 is concerned and argued that respondent no.3
namely Chief Develop Officer/ District Development Officer, District
Rampur be directed to make the payment of aforesaid amount to the
petitioner.
4. It transpires from perusal of the record that earlier order dated
19.05.2007 was passed by the District Development Officer, Rampur by
which the recovery from the petitioner between 01.04.2001 till
29.09.2003 has been made.
WRIA No. 5509 of 2026
2
5. The present writ petition has been filed to return the aforesaid amount.
It is not stated in the entire writ petition nor any arguments has been
raised that whether the aforesaid order namely 19.05.2007 was ever been
challenged by the petitioner before the appropriate authority.
6. It is admitted that the aforesaid order is existing even today.
7. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that relief sought
by the petitioner could not be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition is
dismissed. No order as to costs.
8. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is entitled for any post retiral
dues, authority concerned will consider and make the payment of the
same to the petitioner, in accordance with law.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
April 20, 2026
Swati
Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…