Allowed

Amar Nath v. U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2021WRIA/5098/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that a writ of mandamus shall issue directing the Managing Director of U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. to decide the petitioner's claim for withheld gratuity within three months from the date of production of the order.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued commanding respondent no.1 to decide the claim for release of withheld gratuity amount within three months.

Amar Nath Vs U.P. State Bridge Corporation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5098 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Amar Nath

¶4

Respondent :- U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod K. Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the respondent and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶7

The petitioner claims that the gratuity amount payable to the petitioner has been withheld. He has made an application for disbursal of the gratuity amount.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel in his usual fairness submits that the respondent authorities are under an obligation of law to consider the claim for entitlement to service benefits within a reasonable period of time.

¶9

Learned counsel for both the parties agree that no useful purpose will be served by exchanging the pleadings and keeping this writ petition pending before this Court. With the consent of parties, the writ petition is being disposed of finally.

¶10

Without going into the merits of the case, the matter is remitted to the respondent no.1-Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd., Lucknow.

¶11

A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the respondent no.1-Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge

¶12

Corporation Ltd., Lucknow, to execute the following direction:

¶13

The respondent no.1-Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. Lucknow, shall decide the claim/representation of the petitioner for release of withheld gratuity amount in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of a computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of the High Court Allahabad along with a copy of fresh representation.

¶14

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the party concerned. The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶16

Order Date :- 1.7.2021 Dhananjai

Amar Nath v. U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Nath v. U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harikesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kanhaiya Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nageena Prasad Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bireshwar Das Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramdular Verma Vs State of U P and 8 Others

Deshraj Sharma Vs U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and 2 Others