Jaimal Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 13570 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7500 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Jaimal Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Shri Chandan Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pranab Ojha, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. Present petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-

"I. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order with regard to grant of Gratuity in favour of the petitioner within a period of time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has already sought voluntary retirement and the same has been approved by the competent authority vide order dated 27.08.2020 which is appended along with writ petition at page no. 21 and the same has not been disputed by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of being retired way back in the year 2020 itself, the entire retiral benefit has already been approved except for gratuity.

4. The ground for not extending the benefit of gratuity in favour of the petitioner is that reliance has been made by the competent authority that the option has not been filled up by the petitioner and as such, the same has not been extended in favour of the petitioner.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer and supported the stand taken up by the respondents on which ground the gratuity has not been extended and at the same time it has been fairly apprised by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel that the gratuity is the right of the Government Servant and the same cannot be withheld and extending the benefit of the gratuity will be in shape of reward to the Government Employee.

6. The controversy with regard to the submission of option for seeking retiral benefits has already been settled by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ A No. 28657 of 2014 (Dr. Onkar Nath Katiyar versus State of U.P. And 4 Others) decided on 25.10.2017.

7. In view of the submissions as made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as in the light of the above mentioned judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ A No. 28657 of 2014 (Dr. Onkar Nath Katiyar versus State of U.P. And 4 Others) decided on 25.10.2017, the respondent no. 3 is hereby directed to decide the claim of the gratuity in favour of the petitioner.

8. The entire exercise as directed above, shall be finalized as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

9. The Writ Petition stands disposed off, accordingly.

Order Date :- 1.5.2023

SY