Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

KRISHNA MOHAN MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The court held that the petitioner must first file a fresh representation before the Superintendent of Police with the acquittal order, after which the respondent must decide the pension claim expeditiously, and the court does not decide the merits.

Summary

The petitioner, Krishna Mohan Mishra, challenged an order dated 18.10.2022 by the Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur, which provided only original pension and dearness allowance pending a criminal case. The petitioner was acquitted of the charges on 21.11.2023 and sought payment of his final pension and post‑retirement benefits. The respondent’s standing counsel indicated that the matter could be resolved if the petitioner submitted the acquittal order to the Superintendent. The High Court, with the parties’ consent, disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation, attaching the acquittal order, within two weeks, and ordered the Superintendent to decide the claim within four weeks, without adjudicating the merits. The Court clarified that the decision rests with the respondent after considering the relevant rules and facts.

Issues considered

  • What relief, if any, is available to a pensioner whose criminal case has resulted in acquittal but whose pension was withheld pending the case?
  • Whether the High Court can direct the administrative authority to decide the pension claim without adjudicating the merits of the petition.

Subjects

  • pension
  • acquittal
  • writ petition
  • administrative order
  • criminal case
  • representation
  • High Court
  • procedural direction

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT - A No. - 6233 of 2026

Krishna Mohan Mishra
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                    :   Mujib Ahmad Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent(s)                    :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 6
                    HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. Order dated 18.10.2022 passed by the Superintendent of Police,
Ghazipur/ Respondent No.3 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. By the aforesaid order, the petitioner was provided the original pension
along-with admissible D.A. till the pendency of the criminal case being
Case Crime No.108 of 1997 under Sections 392/ 342/ 427/ 504/ 506
I.P.C. P.S., GRP Cantt, District Varanasi.

3. It is argued that the petitioner has already been acquitted in the
aforesaid case by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Eastern
Railway), Varanasi vide order dated 21.11.2023. It is further argued that
once the petitioner has already been acquitted in the aforesaid case
respondents should make the payment of final pension and other post
retiral benefits which were withheld by the order impugned pursuant to
the pendency of the criminal case.

4. On the other hand, it is argued by the learned Standing Counsel that in
case the petitioner will place the copy of the order of acquittal along-with
other papers and documents before the Respondent No.3, he will take a
decision in the matter, expeditiously.

5. Heard counsel for the parties.

6. With the consent of the counsel for the parties and also in the interest of
justice, the present writ petition is disposed of finally permitting the
petitioner to move a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances
                                                                                             WRIA No. 6233 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    annexing the copy of the order of acquittal along-with necessary papers
                                    and documents before the respondent no.3 namely Superintendent of
                                    Police, Ghazipur within a period of two weeks from today along-with
                                    certified copy of this order. In case any such representation is filed by the
                                    petitioner before the respondent no.3 within the time indicated
                                    hereinabove, he is directed to take a decision in the matter most
                                    expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date
                                    of filing of such representation by the petitioner before him, unless there
                                    is no legal impediment.

                                    7. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merits. It
                                    is upon respondent no.3 to pass order after considering the relevant Rules
                                    as well as facts of the case.



                                                                                             (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Swati




Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
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.