Uzra Khatoon vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Basic ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5290 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 17
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3832 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Uzra Khatoon
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Basic Education Lko And Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rahul Shukla
 

 
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Suresh Vajpayee, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rahul Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3, Sri Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

Instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer;

"(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pay the amount of death-cum-retirement gratuity of the petitioner's husband to the petitioner along with admissible interest forthwith."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that husband of the petitioner namely Ahmad Rasool was initially appointed on 10.01.1974 as Assistant Teacher in District Barabnaki and in the year 1985 he was promoted in Junior High School. He submits that during the service period and working as Head Master at Pooiva Madhyamik Vidyalaya Badanpur, Block Dariyabad, District Barabanki husband of the petitioner died on 26.11.2008.

Petitioner has claimed death-cum-retirement gratuity which has been denied but same is pending consideration before the respondents.

He further submits that the death of husband of the petitioner has happened suddenly and that was unforeseen and as such option for retirement at the age of 60 years as against the normal retirement at the age of 62 year could not be done.

Learned counsel for the petitioner says that there are certain government orders which say that option has to be exercised within the last year in which she would attain the age of 60 years.

Be that as it may, in either eventuality he could not have foreseen his death and had not reached anyway near 60 years, therefore, in view of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Smt. Ranjana Kakkar v. State of U.P. & ors., 2008 10 ADJ 63 which has been followed in the subsequent decision in the case of Anguri Devi v. Regional Joint Director of Education, Agra Region & ors., reported in (2012) 1 LCD 674 and several other case as also a recent decision dated 19.03.2021 in Writ Petition No. 5341 (SS) of 2021 the claim for gratuity is sustainable in law.

The concerned respondent is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for gratuity aforesaid and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is submitted before him. The claim shall not be rejected on the ground that the petitioner's husband had not exercised her option as referred hereinabove, as there was no occasion for the same.

It is open for the petitioner to claim interest on the amount due as per law.

The writ petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms.

Order Date :- 20.6.2022

A.Kr*