Badrunnisha vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 603 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10000 of 2020
 

 
Petitioner :- Badrunnisha
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent.

In pursuance to the previous order passed by this Court, the Standing Counsel has received instructions and on the basis of his instructions states that the petitioner has been denied the gratuity amount on the ground because he had not given his option to retire at the age of 58/60 years.

The present writ petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent-authorities to release and pay the amount of gratuity accruing in favour of the husband of the petitioner to the petitioner who died in 2016 while still in service.

The controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 7.11.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. & 6 Ors.) as well as the judgment and order dated 24.10.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 14397 of 2019 wherein this Court has affirmed the previous judgment of this Court passed in Noor Jahan Vs. State of U.P. & 4 Ors. (Writ - A No. 40568 of 2016) wherein the Court held that in view of the Government Order dated 16th September, 2009, an employee, who has not attained the age of 60 years, would also be entitled to gratuity if he is otherwise covered under the scheme formulated through the aforesaid Government Order. Clause 5 of the said Government Order provides that gratuity would be payable at the age of 60 years or upon death.

In the present case, it is admitted case that the husband of the petitioner died in 2016 while still in service. Consequently, in light of the judgments referred above, the petitioner is entitled to receive the gratuity accrued in favour of her husband.

The writ petition is allowed.

The Finance & Account Officer, Basic Education Officer, District Kanpur i.e., respondent no. 6 is directed to compute the amount payable to the petitioner towards gratuity in terms of the scheme formulated by the Government Order dated 16th September, 2009 and release the amount within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him along with an interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing the application for gratuity till the amount is actually disbursed.

Order Date :- 11.1.2021

IB