Allowed

Smt. Anita Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023WRIA/14268/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the petitioner, widow of a deceased Assistant Teacher who died before attaining 60 years of age, is entitled to death-cum-retirement gratuity. The Court directed respondents to consider her case and ensure payment within two months based on a recent Government Order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents No. 3 and 4 to ensure payment of death-cum-retirement gratuity within two months if the case falls under the Government Order dated 03.02.2023.

Smt. Anita Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:174316

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14268 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Anita Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Ved Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh Kachhawah

¶5

Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents No. 1 and 2 as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh Kachhawah, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No.3 and 4.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the husband of the petitioner, while working on the post of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School, District Etah died on 6.5.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that on the date of death, the age of husband of the petitioner was less than 60 years and, therefore, petitioner is entitled for death-cum-retirement gratuity but the respondents have not paid the amount due towards death-cum-retirement gratuity till date, which is absolutely arbitrary.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been settled by this Court vide judgment and order dated 7.11.2019 passed in Writ-A No. 17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and 6 others). Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited attention of this Court that pursuant to the aforesaid judgment of this Court, State Government itself has issued a Government Order dated 03.02.2023, wherein it is provided that if the death of any teacher working in the primary school takes place before he attains the age of 60 years then his legal heirs will be entitled for payment of death-cum-retirement gratuity and, therefore, the respondents while not paying the amount of death-cum-retirement gratuity to the petitioner are working in absolutely arbitrary manner.

¶9

I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and prima facie it appears that the case of the petitioner is covered by the Government Order dated 03.02.2023 and the petitioner is entitled for the death-cum-

¶10

retirement gratuity.

¶11

In view of the aforesaid reasons, this Writ Petition stands finally disposed of with a direction to Respondents No. 3 and 4 to consider the case of petitioner and if her case is covered by G.O. dated 03.02.2023 then they will ensure the payment of the death-cum-retirement gratuity to the persons entitled for the same within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.

¶12

Order Date :- 28.8.2023 Salim

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SALIM PRAVEJ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Anita Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anita Singh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamta Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shankar Lal Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kunvarpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Khalilur Rahman Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others