Allahabad High Court
Dr. Surendra Kumar Chitoria vs State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. ... on 26 March, 2021
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 8944 of 2021
Petitioner :- Dr. Surendra Kumar Chitoria
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Ayush Health & Anr.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent-State.
Grievance of the petitioner is that after the retirement, the retiral dues of the petitioner were not paid and an order was passed on 5.8.2015, whereby the claim of the petitioner was rejected. The said order was subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No.7767 (S/B) of 2016 (Dr. Surendra Kumar Chitoria Vs. State of U.P. & Others), which was allowed and the impugned order of that writ petition was set aside.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that payment of retiral dues has been made to the petitioner after a long delay without giving interest on the said amount. He submits that in the writ petition, he had prayed for quashing of the impugned order and no request was made to this Court for payment of interest on the amount due for payment to the petitioner. He submits that in compliance of the judgment and order passed by this Court, the petitioner has been paid the amount without any interest on the payment, therefore, by means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has rushed to this Court requesting to provide 12% interest w.e.f. 31.3.2014 to 4.11.2019 on the amount paid after a long spell of time.
In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case liberty is given to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation ventilating all his grievance, which has been raised in the present writ petition before the respondent No.1 and in case direction is issued to consider his claim, justice would be met.
Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that in case the petitioner files an application before the respondent No.1 the same shall be considered and appropriate order shall be passed within a reasonable period.
In view of the above, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the writ petition pending before this Court.
Accordingly, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent No.1 within two weeks from the date or receipt of certified copy of this order. In case such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the respondent No.1 shall consider the claim of the petitioner ventilated through the aforesaid representation and pass appropriate reasoned speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 26.3.2021
Gautam
