Petitioner’s entitlement to absorption and service benefits is contingent upon the final outcome of the pending Writ Appeal.

The petitioner, formerly an employee of a society, sought a writ of mandamus for absorption into the respondent company with all consequential benefits, including equivalent salary, seniority, and promotion

The petitioner challenged the impugned orders dated 24.10.2024 and 09.09.2025, which denied these benefits

The petitioner relied on a prior judgment in Kamlakant Dwivedi v. MP Purva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Ltd. (W.P. No. 4742/2024), where similarly situated employees were granted absorption

The respondents contended that the Kamlakant Dwivedi judgment is currently under challenge in Writ Appeal No. 3105/2025, where a status quo order has been passed

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to absorption and consequential service benefits at par with regular employees based on the precedent set in Kamlakant Dwivedi

2. Whether the pending Writ Appeal (W.A. No. 3105/2025) and the resulting status quo order restrict the High Court from granting immediate relief in the present writ petition

The Court applied the principles of Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding the issuance of writs for the enforcement of legal rights

The Court adhered to the principle of judicial discipline and hierarchical propriety, whereby the outcome of a Single Bench decision is subject to the finality of an appeal pending before a Division Bench (Writ Appeal No. 3105/2025)

The Court observed that the primary basis for the petitioner’s claim was the order passed in Kamlakant Dwivedi (supra)

However, because that specific judgment is currently being scrutinized by a Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 3105/2025, and a stay/status quo order is in effect, the petitioner’s rights cannot be finalized independently at this juncture

The Court reasoned that the petitioner’s entitlement is contingent upon the final outcome of the Writ Appeal; if the respondents' appeal is dismissed, the petitioner’s right to absorption will crystallize based on the Single Bench's precedent

The Court directed that if the said Writ Appeal is dismissed, the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefits extended in the case of Kamlakant Dwivedi; otherwise, the petitioner will be bound by the specific orders passed by the Division Bench in the Writ Appeal