Shanti Devi vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2750 UK

       HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                     Writ Petition (S/S) No. 953 of 2021

Shanti Devi                                                      ........... Petitioner

                                          Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                                 ........ Respondents


Present : Mr. Niranjan Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioner.
          Mr. P.S. Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondents.


                                    JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2.5.2019 (Annexure 17) issued by respondent Divisional Forest Officer, Kedarnath Wild Life Division Gopeshwar.

(b) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to sanction the pension of the petitioner's husband calculating the tenure of service of petitioner's husband since the date of his initial appointment and accordingly the entire arrears of pension be paid to the petitioner.

(c) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant family pension in favour of the petitioner.

(d) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(e) Award cost of the petition."

2. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband retired from the service of the respondent, but he was not paid pension. Her husband has since died. Now petitioner claims pension.

3. Heard.

4. At the very outset, the Court wanted to know from the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to how the instant petition should

be entertained in view of the availability of alternate efficacious remedy from the State Public Services Tribunal, as constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.

5. At it, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that directions may be issued to the respondents to decide the representations dated 04.09.2019 (Annexure No. 18) and Annexure No. 19.

6. Learned State counsel gives a statement that the representations dated 04.09.2019 (Annexure No. 18) and Annexure No. 19 filed by the petitioner would be decided by the respondent concerned within a period of two months from today.

7. The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel.

8. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondent concerned to decide the representations dated 04.09.2019 (Annexure No. 18) and Annexure No. 19 filed by the petitioner within a period of two months from today. But, in case the dispute is still not resolved, even after consideration of the representation, any writ petition, on the subject, shall not be entertained by this Court merely on the ground that it is in sequel to the instant writ petition.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 02.08.2021 Avneet/