Smt. Ashima Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Education Secondary U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2025WRIA/4409/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition for retiral-cum-death benefits disposed with directions to file representation before District Inspector of Schools, Manager and Principal of institution; authorities to decide within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to petitioner to file fresh representation to opposite parties 5, 6 & 7 within 15 days, and those authorities to decide the representation within 2 months and communicate the decision. ¶¶14

Smt. Ashima Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Education Secondary U.P. Lko. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23041

¶2

Court No. - 3

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4409 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Ashima Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Education Secondary U.P. Lko. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ghaus Beg Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ghaus Beg, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-opposite parties no.1 to 5.

¶7

In view of the proposed order, notices to opposite parties no.6 & 7 are hereby dispensed with.

¶8

By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed following main relief:-

¶9

"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to sanction, release and disburse complete retiralcum-death benefits including the amount of gratuity and leave encashment with admissible compound interest as determined by this Hon'ble Court in favour of the petitioner, forthwith."

¶10

Dr. Uday Veer Singh has shown copy of instructions letter dated 23.04.2025 provided by the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur, copy thereof has been provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the same is taken on record.

¶11

As per aforesaid instructions, the required exercise in terms of the prayer is pending consideration wherein cooperation of the petitioner as well as the Committee of Management and Principal of the Institution would be required.

¶12

Be that as it may, since appropriate exercise is under-way, therefore, liberty is given to the petitioner to prefer fresh representation to opposite parties no.5, 6 & 7 i.e. District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur, Manager, Bhagwati Adarsh Vidyalaya Inter College (Bhagwatiganj), (B.A.V. Inter College), District Balrampur and Principal, Bhagwati Adarsh Vidyalaya Inter College (Bhagwatiganj) (B.A.V. Inter College), District Balrampur respectively to do the needful within a period of fifteen days and if such representations are preferred, all the aforesaid authorities shall do the needful redressing the

¶13

grievance of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, with expedition, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order alongwith representation and appropriate decision may be taken and thereafter communicate the decision to the petitioner forthwith.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶15

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 23.4.2025 RBS/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Ashima Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Education Secondary U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ashima Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Education Secondary U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shiv Mohan Yadav Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication Govt. New Delhi and 2 Others

Sarojani Devi and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication New Delhi and 2 Others

Poonam Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Social Welfare U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Forest. Deptt. Lko and 3OTHERS

Satish Kumar Srivastava Vs U.O.I Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Comm. New Delhi and 2 Others

Vijya Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.Throu.Secy.Sports Deptt.Sachivalaya Lko.and Ors.