Dismissed

Smt Vimla Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Sept 2023WRIA/12896/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court accepted the respondent officer's affidavit and exempted his personal appearance due to a plausible error regarding procedural knowledge. Finding the petitioner's gratuity claim satisfied, the court consigned the writ petition to record and dismissed the stay application.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was consigned to record; the stay application was disposed of.

Smt Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12896 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt Vimla Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. and others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha Counsel for Respondent :- CSC

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

(Order on the memo of Writ Petition)

¶6

In compliance with the order dated 19.09.2023, Mahima Chand, Joint Director, Treasury and Pension, Agra Region, Agra is present. He has filed an affidavit also, which is taken on record.

¶7

In paragraph No. 11 of the affidavit, it is averred :

¶8

That it is humbly submitted that due to procedural lack of knowledge the deponent could not file an affidavit before the Hon'ble Court in time, though the deponent had already ensured compliance of the above order of the Hon'ble Court well within time.

¶9

It is also pointed out that he did send a report to the Registrar (Compliance) dated 13.09.2023, believing that he had to report through the Registrar (Compliance) rather than file an affidavit. Though our order dated 29.08.2023 is clear that cause has to be shown on affidavit, but, giving the Joint Director, Treasury and Pension, Agra Region, Agra the benefit of plausible error that he could have committed, the explanation is accepted and the officer's personal appearance is exempted .

¶10

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has been paid his gratuity, as averred in paragraph No. 7 of the affidavit filed by the Joint Director, Treasury and Pension, Agra Region, Agra. The amount of gratuity that has been paid is sum of Rs.1,95,930/- which is actually the difference between the petitioner's entitlement and what he was earlier paid.

¶11

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that there are no further claims of the

¶12

petitioner with regard to the post retiral benefits.

¶13

In this view of the matter, no further orders are required to be made on this writ petition. It is, accordingly, consigned to record .

¶14

(Order on Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 1 of 2023)

¶15

Disposed of .

¶16

For orders, see my order of date passed on the writ petition.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.9.2023 I. Batabyal

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN BATABYAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Vimla Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Vimla Devi v. State of U.P. 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

Deo Datta Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jiya Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Wazid Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Triveni Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chandrapal Vs Managing Director Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam and 3 Others