Allowed

Reshmi v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2022WRIA/6101/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a writ petition seeking death-cum-gratuity for the petitioner, wife of a deceased Assistant Teacher. The Court held that under the relevant Government Order, an employee not yet aged 60 is entitled to gratuity upon death, rejecting the argument that the deceased died before opting for voluntary retirement.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.3 directed to compute and release death-cum-gratuity along with interest at 8% per annum within three months.

Reshmi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6101 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Reshmi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5.

¶6

The present writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, District Azamgarh to pay the death-cum-gratuity of the husband of the petitioner to the petitioner alongwith reasonable interest.

¶7

It has been stated in the writ petition that Late Amerika Singh, the husband of the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher. It has been further stated that the husband of the petitioner died on 28.12.2011 while still in service. It has been stated that the date of birth of the husband of the petitioner was 20.5.1960.

¶8

The counsel for the respondent no.3 has received instructions and states that the gratuity cannot be paid to the petitioner because the husband of the petitioner did not opt for retirement at the age of 60 years in accordance with the relevant Government Order. In the instructions received by the counsel for the respondent no.3, the appointment of the husband of the petitioner and his death as well as his date of birth is not disputed.

¶9

In view of the fact that the date of birth of the husband of the petitioner was 20.5.1960, the husband of the petitioner would have retired if opted for retirement at the age of 60 years, on 19.5.2020. In the circumstances, the husband of the petitioner died before the last date to opt for retirement at the age of 60 years expired.

¶10

The controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 7.11.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. & 6 Others) as well as the judgment and order dated 24.10.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 14397 of 2019 wherein this Court has afÏrmed the previous judgment of this Court passed in Noor Jahan Vs. State of U.P. & 4 Others (Writ - A No. 40568 of 2016) wherein the Court held that in view of the Government Order dated 16th September, 2009, an employee, who has not attained the age of 60 years, would also be entitled to gratuity if he is otherwise covered under the scheme formulated through the aforesaid Government Order. Clause 5 of the said Government Order provides that gratuity would be payable at the age of 60 years or upon death.

¶11

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

¶12

The Basic Education OfÏcer, Azamgarh, respondent No.3 is directed to compute the amount payable to the petitioner towards gratuity in terms of the scheme formulated by the relevant Government Order and release the amount within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before them along with an interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing the application for gratuity till the amount is actually disbursed.

¶13

Order Date :- 26.4.2022 Atul kr. sri.

¶14

Digitally signed by ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.04.26 16:58:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Reshmi v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reshmi v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sapna Maurya Vs University Grants Commission and 2 Others

C/M Nehru Junior High School and 12 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Satya Prakash Sharma and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Priyanka Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Committee of Management, Seth Teerath Prasad Rameshwar Prasad Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shailendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. 5 Others