SHIV NARESH SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Yashpal Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.

(2.) Since dispute pertaining to both the petitions is similar in nature, therefore both the petitions were heard together and are being decided by a common order.

(3.) Initially, Writ Petition 4292(S/S) of 1997 had been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties to release post-retiral benefits of petitioner within a specified period. Subsequently, by means of amendment, orders dated 23.03.1999 and 03.07.2000 directing recovery from post retiral benefits of petitioner, has also been challenged.