Jagannath Prasad Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 27626 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:194751
 
Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16423 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Jagannath Prasad Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Tripathi,Ashok Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra who appears for respondent no. 4.

2. In view of the order proposed to be passed notices are being issued to fifth respondent.

3. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed on the post of Sahayak Adhyapak on 01.08.1978 in the fifth respondent institution, Shri Sankatha Prasad Vaidhya Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and he was assigned the charge of officiating the principal with effect from 01.07.2017 and he superannuated on 30.06.2020 though, he was paid pension but G.P.F. amount of Rs. 33,96,776/- has not yet been paid to the writ petitioner despite the fact that the Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Vidhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur had accorded payment of the said amount.

3. Writ petitioner claims to have represented before the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment passed in Writ -A No. 9216 of 2023 Brahma Nand Shukla Vs. State of U.P. and 4 others decided on 29.08.2023.

4. Prayer in the present petition is for a mandamus directing respondent no. 2 to take steps for payment of the G.P.F. along with interest @18%.

5. Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that in case according to the writ petitioner there stands an order dated 12.11.2021 passed by the second respondent determining the payment of an amount of Rs. 33,96,776/- with regard to the payment of G.P.F. then the petitioner may prefer representation before the second respondent who shall address the claim of the writ petitioner and pass order in that regard. He further submits that in view of the order proposed to passed today, he does not seek to file any response to the writ petition.

6. Considering the submission of the rival parties and stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed of without seeking any response granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the second respondent for redressal of the grievance while filing a comprehensive representation along with self attested copy of the writ petition and certified copy of the order and on the receipt of the same, the second respondent shall put to notice respondent no. 5 and decide the claim of the writ petitioner within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of the order in light of the communication dated 12.11.2021 of the Director of Education, Mirzapur reference whereof has been in para 13 to the writ petition.

7. While deciding the controversy, the authority shall also compute rate of interest in the amount payable in that regard.

Order Date :- 9.10.2023

S.A.