Siddhidatri vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 4169 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1659 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Siddhidatri
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Kamal Kumar Kesherwani, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Ashok Kumar who appears for respondent Nos. 3 to 4.

Grievance of the writ petitioner is that her husband namely, Ashok Sahu while working as Assistant Teacher at Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya Tedhpa, Block Khuniyanv, District Siddharth Nagar died-in-harness on 21.01.2022.

According to the writ petitioner all the terminal benefits have been paid except death-cum-retirement gratuity. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court towards para 16 so as to contend that the only ground on which the gratuity is being withheld is that the petitioner's husband did not exercise option of being retired at the age of 60 years (earlier 58 years). Learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court towards the judgment in Writ-A No. 17399 of 2019 decided on 07.11.2019 so as to contend now the said objection is not available to the respondents. Learned Standing Counsel as well as the counsel who appears for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 on the basis of the instructions have argued that the case of the writ petitioners stands covered by the decision of Usha Rani (supra) and they do not propose to file any counter affidavit in that regard. According to them the grievances of the writ petitioners can very well be addressed by the third respondent, District Basic Education Officer, District Siddhartnagar.

Considering the rival submissions of the parties as well as the statement made by the respondents they do not propose to file response to the writ petition, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction granting liberty to the petitioners to prefer a composite representation before the third respondent who shall endeavour to decide the same within a period of six weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order, after considering the entitlement of the petitioner and any competing claims in this Court. At this juncture, learned Standing Counsel as well as counsel who appears for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have relied upon the Government Order dated 03.02.2023 so as to further contend that now the claim of the writ petitioner shall not be rejected on the ground that option has not been exercised.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Needless to point out that this Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case.

Order Date :- 9.2.2023

Rajesh