Pradeep Kumar Agarwal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 12510 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Judgments reserved
 
Court No. - 36
 

 
1)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5552 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Agarwal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Shukla
 
Along with
 
2)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5932 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Mohan Singh Bisht
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Krishna Tiwari
 
3)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6193 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Vijay Rani
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal
 
4)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6218 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Jay Devi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal
 
5)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6173 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Gaurav Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Chandan Agarwal
 
6)  Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6991 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Ashish Verma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
 
7) Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6992 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Panwar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
 
8) Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6995 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Urmila
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

1. All the above referred writ petitions involve identical questions of law and facts. The Writ Petition (A) No. 5552 of 2023 is being treated as the leading writ petition and the facts pertaining to the same are being considered for deciding the controversy involved.

2. Heard Shri Kamal Kumar Kesherwani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Amit Shukla, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 & 4. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice of the writ petition on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

3. The writ petitioner, by means of Writ-A No. 5552 of 2023, has approached this Court seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the admissible interest upon the amount of gratuity and GPF of the petitioner's wife from the date of entitlement.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that the wife of the petitioner Smt. Kripa Agarwal (since deceased) was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 25.1.1999 and took charge on 6.2.1999. The wife of the petitioner was promoted in the Junior High School maintained by the Board of Basic Education, Allahabad. The wife of the petitioner is stated to have expired on 24.5.2021. All the dues including family pension was sanctioned by the respondent authorities on 13.8.2021, but the amount of gratuity was not paid. The petitioner made several representations to the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 for release of the death-cum-retirement gratuity. However, no heed was paid to the request of the petitioner. The petitioner was compelled to institute Writ-A No. 17605 of 2021 which writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2021 directing the District Basic Education Officer, Pilibhit to consider the representation of the petitioner within two months. The order of the Writ Court was not complied with and the petitioner was compelled to file Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1386 of 2022. The claim for payment of gratuity was allowed by the District Basic Education Officer vide order dated 29.6.2022 and in compliance thereof the amount of gratuity was credited in the bank account of the petitioner on 19.7.2022. No interest was paid on the delayed payment which was being paid after 14 months.

5. It is contended that gratuity being part and parcel of the pensionary/retiral benefits delayed payment is liable to be compensated by adequate interest. Reliance has been placed upon the Apex Court decisions in the case of Dr. Uma Agarwal versus State of U.P. and others reported in 1999 (3) SCC 438, Smt. Madhuri Devi versus State of U.P. and others reported in 2001 (9) SCC 687 as also Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in the case of Shripati Tripathi versus State of U.P. and others reported in 2011 (1) ESC 357 (All) (DB) and in the case of Smt. Pushpa Sharma versus State of U.P. and others reported in 2016 (9) ADJ 55 (DB). Reliance is also placed upon decision dated 10.10.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 15879 of 2012 (Smt. Santosh versus State of U.P. and others). It is thus contended that the writ petition is liable to be allowed as prayed.

6. Sh. Amit Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent Nos. 3 & 4 as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 could not refute the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, the Court finds that the wife of the petitioner was entitled to the payment of gratuity. The death-cum-retirement benefits were sanctioned by the respondents on 13.8.2021 but amount of gratuity was not paid. The petitioner had to resort to initiate legal proceedings in compliance of which the payment of gratuity was sanctioned by the District Basic Education Officer, Pilibhit vide order dated 29.6.2022 and the actual payment was done only on 10.7.2022 after delay of 14 months. The delay in payment is clearly attributable to the respondents.

8. This Court in the case of Sarvesh Kumari versus State of U.P. and others reported in 2019 (7) ADJ 357 while allowing the cliam of the petitioner therein for payment of gratuity observed as under:-

"In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned decision is manifestly illegal and is accordingly quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The third respondent is directed to forthwith proceed to calculate the amount of death-cum-retirement gratuity payable to the petitioner and pay the same to her within a period of six weeks from today along with 8% per annum simple interest till the date of actual payment."

9. A Division Bench of this Court while dealing with a Special Appeal, being Special Appeal Defective No. 430 of 2016 (Smt. Nazma Khatoon versus State of U.P. and 4 others) arising out of a decision of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed for payment of interest on the appeal and setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition observed as under:-

"In our opinion, the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that the earlier writ petition (first writ petition) was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the question of payment of interest. The first writ petition was disposed of with a single direction to decide the claim of the petitioner.

Even otherwise, we are of the opinion that interest is a necessary corollary to the retention of money by another person. It is neither compensatory nor penal in nature and in that regard matter has been adjudicated upon by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Ranjana Kakar Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2008(10)ADJ 63(DB).

Following the law so laid down by the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to get interest at the rate of 8 percent on the money of gratuity payment whereof has been delayed by the respondents. Interest so payable shall be calculated from the date the money was due by the date of actual payment."

10. In view of the above, the claim of the interest made by the petitioner on the delayed payment of the gratuity is wholly justified. In such facts, the petitioner is entitled to payment of interest for delayed payment of gratuity @ 8% as provided in Sarvesh Kumari (supra) from the date of entitlement to the date of actual payment i.e. 19.7.2022.

11. Accordingly, all aforesaid writ petitions stand allowed. The petitioner shall be paid interest @ 8% per annum from the date of entitlement to the date of payment i.e. 19.7.2022 by the respondents within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order of this Court.

Order Date :- 24.4.2023

Ravi Prakash

(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.)