Allahabad High Court
Purushottam Verma 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:61129
Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6409 of 2023
Petitioner :- Purushottam Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Co-Operative Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Present petition has been filed with the following reliefs:
"(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned decision as taken by the opposite party no.3 for deduction of amount of Rs. 1,83,250/- from the post-retiral dues of the petitioner, as is evident from the impugned order dated 10-05-2023, contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition, after summoning the originals of the same;
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to give effect to the impugned decision so taken by the opposite party no.3 for deduction of amount of Rs. 1,83,250/- from the post-retiral dues of the petitioner, as is evident from the impugned order dated 10-05-2023, contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition, after summoning the originals of the same;
(iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the petitioner his post-retiral dues including Leave Encashment and Group Gratuity with all consequential benefits including interest thereon @ 12% w.e.f. 31-07- 2021 till the date of actual payment to the petitioner ;
......"
2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there being no inquiry or proceedings as contemplated under Regulation 85 of U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees Service Regulation, 1975 read with Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the non-payment of the dues to which the petitioner was entitled is bereft of any provisions of law and violates Article 300A of the Constitution of India. He relies upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Aditya Kumar Pathak v. Provincial Co-Operative Federation and Anr. (Writ - A No.10638 of 2020) decided on 01.03.2023.
3. Respondents have filed their short counter affidavit taking a ground that on the basis of a financial inquiry conducted, it was revealed that the petitioner alongwith two other persons were responsible for financial misappropriation and based upon the said report, the order impugned was passed deducting the amount from the amounts payable to the petitioner.
4. I have considered the said submission made in the short counter affidavit. However, the said reasoning falls short of the requirement enabling the respondents to withhold the retiral dues.
5. There being no compliance of Section 85 of the Service Regulation, 1975 and no proceedings as contemplated under Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the order restraining the payment of gratuity solely based upon some inquiry cannot be justified. The same clearly falls short of the requirement contemplated under the two provisions, as such, the writ petition is allowed.
6. Impugned order dated 10.05.2023 is quashed.
7. Respondents are directed to pay the entire dues, including the gratuity and leave encashment withheld vide impugned order dated 10.05.2023, to the petitioner within a period of three months.
8. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 7% per annum from 30th day of retirement till actual payment/realization on the unpaid amounts.
9. This order has been passed in the presence of Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, counsel appearing for the respondent.
Order Date :- 22.9.2023
nishant
