Allahabad High Court
Smt. Suman Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 22 September, 2023
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:61180
Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6445 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Suman Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishabh Kapoor
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that the husband of the petitioner was employed with the respondent and even after his retirement, gratuity amount was not paid to the husband of the petitioner.
2. It bears from record that subsequently the husband of the petitioner died and the petitioner claims that she should be paid the gratuity amount, however, the same is not being paid probably on account of some executive order seeking to recover some amounts from the husband of the petitioner.
3. This issue with regard to right of the respondents to withhold the gratuity without any disciplinary inquiry was considered by this Court in the case of Meena Srivastava v. State of U.P. & Ors. (Writ - A No.132 of 2023) decided on 01.02.2023 in which this Court had held that the respondents are not authorised to withhold the gratuity unless the same is prescribed by any statutory provision. This Court had considered the arguments of the respondents in respect of Rule 922 of Civil Service Regulation and had allowed the said writ petition with direction to pay the amount of gratuity alongwith interest and cost.
4. It is informed by Shri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for the respondents, that against the said judgment passed on 01.02.2023, a special appeal was preferred in which cost as imposed by this Court was quashed; the other part of the order was affirmed.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents argues that aggrieved against the interest in the case of Meena Srivastava (supra), the respondents have preferred an SLP in which Diary No.38560 of 2023 has been assigned.
6. Considering the fact that the issue with regard to right of withholding gratuity has already been decided by this Court and affirmed in special appeal and the fact that the SLP filed by the respondent is confined to grant of interest, I do not see any reason not to follow the earlier judgment in the case of Meena Srivastava (supra) except insofar as it imposes the cost.
7. Thus, on the reasoning as recorded in the case of Meena Srivastava (supra), the present writ petition deserves to be allowed and ordered accordingly.
8. Respondents are directed to pay the amount of gratuity to which the husband of the petitioner was entitled alongwith interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the 30th day of retirement of the husband of the petitioner till actual payment/realisation.
9. The amount, as directed above, shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of two months from today.
Order Date :- 22.9.2023
nishant
