Allahabad High Court
Nirmala Agarwal vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. ... on 8 March, 2021
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 32 of 2015
Petitioner :- Nirmala Agarwal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. & Anot
Counsel for Petitioner :- Girdhari Lal Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent - State.
2. The petitioner is wife of deceased employee - Lt. Suman Chandra Agarwal, who was working as Collection Amin in Tehsil Sadar, District Lucknow.
3. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against petitioner's husband and after conclusion of inquiry, he was removed from service. The order of removal was subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No.6118 (S/S) of 1993 which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 27.05.2009. The petitioner requested for payment of amount of GPF and GIS payable to her husband.
4. When no action was taken, the present writ petition has been filed before this court for issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No.2 to make payment of dues as stated by the petitioner in annexure-3 to the writ petition.
5. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled for payment of GPF and GIS amount lying pending with the respondent. He submitted that in the counter affidavit it has been stated that in paragraph-4 that due to non submission of requisite papers, the payment of GPF and GIS could not be made to the petitioner.
6. In response to the statement of fact made in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit, he invited attention of this court on annexure-RA1 that he has submitted certain papers to the respondent No.2 but no action whatsoever has been taken for release of the claimed amount to the petitioner.
7. He submitted that in case direction is issued to respondent No.2 for consideration of claim of the petitioner in a time bound manner, ends of justice would be met.
8. He further submitted that although the petitioner has submitted papers before respondent No.2 and in case those papers are not sufficient for disposal of the claim setup by the petitioner, she will submit other demanded requisite papers shortly.
9. On the other hand, learned standing counsel on the basis of statement made in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit submitted that in case the petitioner has submitted requisite papers for disposal of her claim before respondent No.2, the same shall be taken care of and appropriate order shall be passed within a reasonable period.
10. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
11. In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, with the consent of parties, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive application along with relevant documents before respondent No.2 within two weeks from today. In case such an application is filed within aforesaid period, the respondent No.2 shall consider the same and shall pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 8.3.2021
Adarsh K Singh
