Allahabad High Court
SMT ZAHIDA BEGUMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage and directed the respondent to decide the representation within two months, without adjudicating the substantive merits.
Summary
Petitioner Zahida Begum filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and others to release her late husband's pension and family pension and to decide a representation filed on 23-12-2025 in accordance with earlier judgments dated 12-03-2018 and 03-08-2023. The petitioner relied on a prior writ (Writ A No.33526 of 2016) that had been allowed and on subsequent appellate and review proceedings. The Court, with the parties' consent, disposed of the petition at the admission stage without examining the merits. It issued a direction to the Commissioner (Industry), U.P., Kanpur to decide the representation within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order. The Court clarified that this ex parte disposal does not constitute a substantive ruling on the merits and that the respondent must independently consider the matter according to law.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, is appropriate for the petitioner regarding the release of pension and family pension?
- Whether the respondent should be directed to decide the representation dated 23-12-2025 in light of the earlier judgments.
Subjects
- pension
- family pension
- mandamus
- representation
- ex parte disposal
- admission stage
- High Court
- administrative decision
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7295 of 2026
Smt Zahida Begum
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd Abubakar, Shadab Husain,
Aditya Bhushan Singhal, Md. Aman
Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1. Heard Sri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayers :-
"I. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents to release pension and family pension along with all consequential
benefits in favour of the petitioner arising out of the services rendered by her late
husband.
II. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondents to decide the representation dated 23.12.2025 submitted by the petitioner
(Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition) in the light of the judgments dated 12.03.2018
and 03.08.2023 within a time-bound period."
3. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that a petition being Writ A
No.33526 of 2016 was filed by Shiv Jag Sharma along-with 9 others
before this Court, which was finally allowed vide judgement and order
dated 12.03.2018. Aggrieved against the aforesaid special appeal filed by
the State being Special Appeal No.707 of 2019 connected with various
other special appeals was dismissed vide judgement and order dated
03.08.2023. The SLP filed against the aforesaid order being Special
Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.(S) 21342 of 2024 was dismissed as
WRIA No. 7295 of 2026
2
withdrawn with liberty to the State Government to file review petition. In
the contempt proceedings initiated by one Mahmood Akhtar Khan, an
affidavit of compliance has been filed by the Commissioner and Director
of Industry, U.P. Kanpur. In paragraph-8 of which it is stated that the
department has taken a decision to comply the order of Hon'ble Apex
Court in its letter and spirit, copy of the decision taken by the State
Government dated 25.10.2024 is appended as annexure-2 to the aforesaid
affidavits. It is further argued that since a decision has been taken to
provide certain benefits to the similarly situated persons the petitioner is
also entitled for the same.
4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is
being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
5. Taking into consideration the nature of relief sought by the petitioner and
without dwelling upon the merit of the matter, the petition is disposed of
with the direction to respondent no.2-Commissioner (Industry), U.P.,
Kanpur to take a decision on the representation dated 23.12.2025 preferred
by the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order.
6. Since the writ petition has been decided on an exparte version without
seeking any response from the respondents, thus the passing of the order
today may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the
merits of the matter and the second respondent shall accord independent
consideration strictly in accordance with law and the mandate of law holding
the field.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 14, 2026
Pramod Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…