Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 20018 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 30 May, 2024

Author: Abdul Moin

Bench: Abdul Moin

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41332
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4364 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Deptt. Of Finance) U.P. Lko. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendra S Singh Rathore,Abhishek Upadhyay,Bhavesh Chandel,Sachin Upadhyay
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided.

3. Instant writ petition has been filed praying for the following main reliefs:-

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 14.06.2022 and 18.08.2023 passed by respondent No.3 and its consequential recovery from the amount of gratuity which is collectively annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the entire amount of Rs.9,14,764/- deducted from the amount of gratuity in pursuance of the impugned orders"

4. There is consensus at bar that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court passed in Writ-A No. 24464 of 2021 in re: Hari Ram Vs. State of U.P and Ors, decided on 14.02.2023, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition.

5. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The orders impugned dated14.06.2022 and 18.08.2023, copies of which are annexure 1 collectively to the writ petition are quashed.

6. It is provided that the amount deducted by the respondents shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today.

7. However, in case petitioner falls within the exception of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, 2015 (4) SCC 334', the respondents shall pass a fresh order only after giving a notice and due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Such a notice may be given by the respondents, if so required, to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and the entire process shall also be completed within a further period of two months from the date of issuance of notice. In case such a notice is not issued to the petitioner within six weeks, respondents shall also pay the amount already deducted from the petitioner by means of the impugned orders.

Order Date :- 30.5.2024

prateek