Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4513 of 2021
Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 to 3 and Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.4 to 6.
The petitioner, by means of the present writ petition, has prayed for the following relief:-
"(a) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to pay the amount of death- cum gratuity of the petitioner's wife to the petitioner along with admissible interest as possible at earliest.
(b). Issue, any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case to which the petitioner may found entitle in law.
(c). Allow this writ petition and award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he confined his prayer only with respect to payment of death-cum gratuity amount.
The wife of the petitioner, namely, Late Smt. Usha Verma was working as Headmaster at Primary School, Bharala, Block Daurala, District Meerut and she died on 16.07.2020 during the service period. After completing all the requisite formalities, petitioner submitted application for releasing of pension and other death-cum retirement benefits, which was duly forwarded to the competent authority and all the dues have been paid except the amount of gratuity and family pension. Thereafter the petitioner had been persuading the respondent authorities for payment of death-cum retirement gratuity and he had also given representations to the authority concerned in this regard, but all went vain. The office assistants of respondent no.5- District Basic Education Officer, Meerut orally informed that the gratuity to petitioner has been denied on the ground that wife of the petitioner had not opted for payment of gratuity during the service period, and therefore, he is not eligible for gratuity.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the controversy in hand is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court in Writ-A No.17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and 6 Others), and therefore, the reason for denying the death-cum gratuity to the petitioner that his wife has not exercised the option of retirement at the age of 60 years is illegal and being in teeth of the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra).
Learned counsel for the respondents could not point out from the record that the controversy in hand is not covered by the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra), in fact he fairly conceded that the controversy in hand is covered by the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra).
Since, the controversy in hand is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra), therefore, the present writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra).
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 NS