Allahabad High Court
Sudha Singh vs Deputy Director Of Education ... on 27 January, 2023
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1047 of 2023
Petitioner :- Sudha Singh
Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Education (Secondary Education) Basti And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Raj Singh,Adarsh Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos. 1 & 2.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 14.09.2022 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Basti rejecting the claim of the petitioner for being paid the gratuity amount of her husband as well as consequential mandamus commanding the Deputy Director to release the amount of gratuity along with admissible interest to the petitioner.
The facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner Late Uday Bhan Singh was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher in Ram Asrey Singh Inter College Samiti, Gaur, Basti on 09.07.1973. The service book of the deceased husband of the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. A perusal of the service book shows that the date of birth of the husband of the petitioner was 01.07.1952.
It has been stated in the writ petition that the husband of the petitioner died on 12.03.2010 at the age of 58 years while still in service.
The petitioner filed an application for releasing the gratuity amount of her husband but the said application has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 14.09.2022 on the ground that before his death the husband of the petitioner had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years.
The contents of the order dated 14.09.2022 indicates that the fact regarding the employment of the husband of the petitioner in the institution is admitted in the impugned order passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Basti. The date of birth of the husband of the petitioner as recorded in the service book shows that if he had not died while still in service, the husband of the petitioner would have retired at the age of 60 years in 2012. Evidently, the husband of the petitioner died before the last date for submitting his option for retirement at the age of 60 years.
The controversy involved in the present writ petition has been fully decided by this Court in Writ - A No. 17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. & 6 Others) and the judgment and order dated 24.10.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 14397 of 2019 as well as the judgement and order dated 14.5.2019 passed in Writ A No.7416 of 2019 (Smt.Sarvesh Kumari versus State of U.P and others). In view of the aforesaid judgments, the petitioner is entitled to be paid the gratuity amount due to her husband.
The Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Basti Region, District Basti i.e., respondent no. 1 is directed to compute the amount payable to the petitioner towards gratuity of her husband within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him along with simple interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing the application for gratuity till the amount is actually disbursed, ignoring the fact that the husband of the petitioner had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years and if otherwise eligible.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 27.1.2023
Swati
