Allahabad High Court
KALLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court declined to grant mandamus and instead directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the appropriate authority for expeditious disposal.
Summary
The petitioner, a former Safai Nayak (Class IV) employee, retired on 30 June 2025 and alleges that the State of Uttar Pradesh and associated local bodies have failed to pay his full retiral benefits with interest. He filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Nagar Palika Parishad officials (respondents 4 and 5) to pay the dues. The respondents argued that the grievance should be addressed by the Executive Officer of the Nagar Palika Parishad and expressed willingness to consider a fresh representation by the petitioner. The Court found that continuing the petition would not serve any useful purpose and ordered the petitioner to file a fresh representation within three weeks, after which the respondent must decide the matter within three months. No merits of the claim were examined, and the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the appropriate authority again.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted by a writ of mandamus directing payment of retiral benefits to a retired government employee?
Subjects
- retirement benefits
- mandamus
- public service employment
- administrative law
- pension payment
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6642 of 2026
Kallu
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shiv Murti Kushwaha
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vijay Kumar Dixit
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents; learned counsel for the Nagar Palika
Parishad, Pilibhit and perused the record on Board.
2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following
relief:-
"to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding/directing the respondent no. 4 and 5 to pay entire retiral
benefits alongwith interest to the petitioner within stipulated period as fix
by this Hon'ble Court."
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation
on 30.06.2025, while he was working on the post of Safai Nayak (class iv
employee); however, he has not been paid the entire retiral benefits along
with interest.
4. Learned counsel for the Nagar Palika Parishad (respondents no.4 to 6)
has contended that the grievance of the petitioner can be more
appropriately redressed by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad,
Pilibhit (respondent no.5) and he has no objection if a direction is issued
for expeditious disposal of a fresh representation, to be moved by the
present petitioner, within such stipulated period, as may be directed by
this Court.
5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
keeping this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
WRIA No. 6642 of 2026
2
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 with respect to 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 before the respondent no.2, 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.
6. With the aforesaid direction, instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
May 5, 2026
VR
Digitally signed by :-
VIBHA RATAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…