Disposed

Smt Priti Bansal v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2023WRIA/1366/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking death and retirement gratuity. Instead of deciding immediately, the Court permitted the petitioner to submit a fresh representation for a final administrative decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to make fresh representation; respondent authority directed to pass order within two months thereof.

Smt Priti Bansal Vs State of U.P. and 5… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1366 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt Priti Bansal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the following prayer:-

¶7

"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to pay the amount of death cum retirement gratuity of the petitioner's husband to the petitioner along with admissible interest forthwith."

¶8

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner is entitled for gratuity but the same has not been paid to the petitioner without any rime and reason. It is argued that in this regard, representation has been made by the petitioner before the respondent No.3/The District Inspector of Schools, District - Moradabad on 11.11.2022 but till date no final decision has been taken in the matter.

¶9

On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that in case, the petitioner will file fresh representation along with relevant papers, the respondent No.3 will take appropriate decision in the matter expeditiously. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances along with necessary papers and certified copy of this order before the respondent no.3/The District Inspector of Schools, District - Moradabad within a period of three weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no.3 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter.

¶11

Order Date :- 25.1.2023 saqlain

¶12

Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Priti Bansal v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Priti Bansal v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Nagendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anurag Yadav Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Committee of Management Hamida Islamia Inter College Panwari Mahoba Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virajman Shankar Dham Mandir Sewa Samiti through Its President Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Atma Das Shiv Prasad Balika Inter College Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chandrapal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others