Allahabad High Court
Neelam Singh vs Sri Bhupendra Singh, Basic ... on 6 October, 2023
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:64722
Court No. - 4
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2929 of 2023
Applicant :- Neelam Singh
Opposite Party :- Sri Bhupendra Singh, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Pratapgarh And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Ran Vijay Singh, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no. 1, the same is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 1.
3. The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the order of Writ Court dated 29.08.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 5441 of 2022 which reads as under:
"Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2 and Shri P.K. Singh 'Bisen', learned counsel for Respondents 3 and 4.
Briefly stated case of the Petitioner is that her husband Late Vinod Kumar Singh had joined the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School,Mahaveer Shiksha Niketan, Pratapgarh and he died on 27.4.2011.The Petitioner applied for payment of gratuity after death of her husband but no action was taken on her representations. It is stated that the authorities orally informed the Petitioner that her husband late Vinod Kumar Singh had not exercised his option for retirement on attaining the age of 60 years and, therefore, he was not entitled for payment of gratuity.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Anoop Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & others, 2018 ADJ 63 wherein after relying upon various earlier decisions, this Court held that for rejection of the Petitioner's claim of payment of gratuity on the ground that the employee had not exercised his option, is not sustainable in law and, accordingly, the order of rejection was quashed and the authorities were directed to consider the claim of the Petitioner for payment of gratuity afresh, which shall not be rejected on the ground that the Petitioner's husband had not exercised his option. The aforesaid decisions has been followed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the judgment and order dated 02.06.2022 passed in Writ A No. 3410 of 2022.
Accordingly, keeping in view the proposition of law laid down as in the aforesaid case, the instant writ petition also deserves to be allowed.
Consequently, the Writ Petition is allowed. The Respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider the claim of the Petitioner for payment of gratuity within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them and it is provided that while considering the merit of the claim, it shall not be rejected on the ground that the husband of the Petitioner had not exercised his option for retirement on attaining the age of 60 years.
However, there shall no order as to costs."
4. Sri Ran Vijay Singh has produced the copy of the letter dated 3rd of October, 2023 preferred by District Basic Education Officer, Pratapgarh addressing to Additional Director, Treasury & Pension, Prayagraj, thereby the PPO has been issued to make payment of gratuity to the present petitioner who is widow of late Vinod Singh who was serving on the post of Assistant Teacher. Sri Ran Vijay Singh, on the basis of instructions, has stated that the amount of gratuity, in terms of order dated 03.10.2023, shall be credited in the account of the present petitioner very soon. The copy of the letter dated 03.10.2023 is taken on record and one copy thereof has been given to learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. In the wake of aforesaid development, the present contempt petition is dismissed.
6. Notices are discharged.
7. However, if the amount of the gratuity is not credited in the account of the petitioner or the same is not paid to the petitioner within three weeks from today, to be more precise on or before 31st of October, 2023, learned counsel for the petitioner may file an appropriate application seeking revival of the contempt petition. If such application is filed in the contempt petition, the order of personal appearance may be issued against the opposite parties for non-compliance of the order of Writ Court.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
Order Date :- 6.10.2023
kkv/
