Smt. Chandra Kanti Sinha vs State Of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy., ...
2019 Latest Caselaw 5974 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 374 of 2017
 

 
Appellant :- Smt. Chandra Kanti Sinha
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy., Madhyamik Education & 7 Ors.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Rahul Mishra,Manik Sinha
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

Heard Sri Manik Sinha, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Pradeep Raje, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent side.

This special appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.03.2005 by which learned Writ Court while disposing of the writ petition directed the opposite parties to take possession of Government quarter from the petitioner and release of her gratuity and the amount of Rs. 50,000/- be released within a period of three months.

Learned Senior Counsel Sri Manik Sinha has submitted that on 18.03.2005 no one was present on behalf of the appellant and on the basis of the application filed by the petitioner on 16.03.2005 for release of her gratuity, the writ petition was disposed of.

He submitted that the other relief in the writ petition to condone the break in service rendered for the period 15.08.1972 to 23.11.1972 and counting the services rendered for the period 13.11.1964 to 14.08.1972 and for the purpose of fixation of pay, gratuity, pension and grant of selection grade have not been considered.

He submitted that that the petitioner is also entitled to interest on gratuity amount. Though the appellant retired from service on 30.06.1991, but prior to filing of the above writ petition, she made a number of representations to the authorities concerned from time to time as those representations were not decided she filed a writ petition and there is no delay in filing the writ petition. The Court has committed an error in rejecting the review application.

On due consideration of the aforesaid so also the fact that the writ petition was filed in the year 1998 without revealing the fact as to whether explanation for the delay of more than three years i.e. from the retirement of date of service and for the period of condonation in break in service from 1972 and we are of the view that the learned Writ Court has rightly disposed of the writ petition and other relief which was claimed in the writ petition was subsequently considered and decided in Review Application dated 25.11.2017.

No case is made out to interfere with the impugned order.

The special appeal is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.

[Jaspreet Singh, J.] [Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal]

Order Date :- 9.7.2019

Asheesh