Allahabad High Court
RAMAADHAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The petition is dismissed and the petitioner is directed to move a fresh representation before the Executive Officer, with the court making no observation on the merits.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramaadhar Yadav, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and other respondents to pay his pending gratuity, pension, leave encashment, bonus, dearness allowance and other accrued benefits, along with interest. The petitioner alleged that despite repeated requests, the amounts remained unpaid. Respondents No.4 and 5 argued that the grievance should be addressed by the Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad, Padrauna, and expressed no objection to the court directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before that officer. The court held that proceeding with the writ would not serve any useful purpose and therefore dismissed the petition without addressing the merits. It directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with the concerned executive officer within three weeks, and the officer to decide the matter within three months, if no legal impediment exists.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition and grant mandamus for payment of gratuity, pension and other service benefits.
- Whether the petitioner should be directed to approach the Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad for redress of his grievance.
Subjects
- gratuity
- pension
- leave encashment
- mandamus
- writ petition
- service benefits
- administrative law
- executive officer
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7456 of 2026
Ramaadhar Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anupam Kumar Shukla, Himanshu
Kumar, Sushmita Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Satyendra Nath Tiwari
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents no.1 to 3; Shri Satyendra Nath Tiwari,
learned counsel for respondents no.4 and 5, and perused the record on
Board.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing Respondent Authorities to make payment of the entire amount of
Gratuity Rs. 10,96,436/-, pension for three months i.e. February 2025 to
April 2025, Leave Encashment, Bonus for two years, Dearness Allowance
and other admissible benefits accrued to the petitioner.
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing Respondent Authorities to pay interest upon the entire amount
of Gratuity Rs. 10,96,436/-, pension for three months i.e. February 2025
to April 2025, Leave Encashment, Bonus for two years, Dearness
Allowance and other admissible benefits."
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has not been paid gratuity, leave
encashment etc., despite repeated request made on his behalf.
4. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents no.4 and 5 has
contended that the grievance of the petitioner can be more appropriately
redressed by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Padrauna,
District Kushi Nagar (respondent no.4) 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.
WRIA No. 7456 of 2026
2
5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
keeping this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
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.4, 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 18, 2026
VR
Digitally signed by :-
VIBHA RATAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…