Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAJNEESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition was dismissed for lack of any legal provision granting the petitioner entitlement to his father's retirement dues.

Summary

Petitioner Rajneesh Kumar, a 34‑year‑old, filed a writ petition seeking the retirement dues of his deceased father from the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents. The petitioner’s counsel was unable to cite any statutory provision that would entitle him to such dues. The court noted the absence of a legal basis for the claim. In the interest of justice, the court disposed of the petition, indicating that if the petitioner can later produce a relevant legal provision, the claim may be reconsidered. No relief was granted at this stage.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to the retirement dues of his father under any statutory provision
  • Whether the court can entertain the petition in the absence of a legal basis

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • retirement dues
  • legal provision
  • interest of justice
  • Allahabad High Court

Judgment

                                              HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                             WRIT - A No. - 6258 of 2026

                                    Rajneesh Kumar
                                                                                                 .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                       Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                                                               .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)                     :    Shashank Sharma
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)                     :    C.S.C.

                                    Court No. - 32
                                                HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

                                    1. Heard Sri Shashank Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner and learned

                                    Standing Counsel for State-Respondents.


                                    2. Learned counsel for petitioner is not able to show any legal provision

                                    that petitioner, a 34 year old person, is entitled for retiral dues of his

                                    father.


                                    3. Still in the interest of justice, this writ petition is disposed of that in

                                    case petitioner is able to show any legal provision before concerned

                                    respondent in support of his prayer, it will be considered in accordance

                                    with law.


                                                                                (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    AK




Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
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.