The Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, presided over by Justice Pankaj Bhatia, has disposed of a writ petition concerning the counting of past service for pensionary and post-retiral benefits, granting the petitioner liberty to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority with a direction to decide the same in accordance with law within four weeks.
Background and Prayers in the Petition
The petitioner, Virendra Singh Yadav, approached the High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Planning Department, Lucknow, and two other respondents.
The petitioner prayed for the issuance of a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent authorities, particularly respondent no. 2, to forthwith add and count his past service rendered in the Uttar Pradesh State Employees Welfare Corporation with effect from March 9, 1990, along with his subsequent continuous service in the Lucknow Development Authority, for the purpose of pay fixation, determination of pension, and calculation of all retiral benefits.
Additionally, the petitioner sought directions commanding respondent no. 2 to process, finalize, and release all lawful post-retiral dues, including pension, gratuity, leave encashment, and other admissible retiral benefits along with interest at a reasonable rate within a fixed timeframe, as well as the consideration and disposal of his pending representation dated November 19, 2025, by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Submissions and Appearance
The petitioner was represented by Advocates Abhishek Singh, Akhand Kumar Pandey, and Gautam Singh Yadav. During the hearing, Sri Akhand Kumar Pandey appeared before the court on behalf of the petitioner.
The respondents were represented by Sri Krishna Kumar Pandey for respondent no. 2, and Sri Prafulla Tiwari for respondent no. 3, along with Advocate Ratnesh Chandra and the learned Standing Counsel for the State. The court took on record the Vakalatnamas filed by Sri Krishna Kumar Pandey and Sri Prafulla Tiwari on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3.
Court’s Analysis and Order
Upon considering the record and noting that the petitioner’s earlier representation was already pending adjudication before respondent no. 2, Justice Pankaj Bhatia disposed of the writ petition with specific directions:
“Considering the fact that the petitioner had already made a representation, which is pending adjudication before the respondent no. 2, the present writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2, who shall decide the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of certified copy of this order.”
Case Title: Virendra Singh Yadav v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others
Case No.: WRITA No. 7475 of 2026 (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC-LKO:58161)
Bench: Justice Pankaj Bhatia
Date: August 18, 2026
