Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Hans Nath Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 July, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned ACSC for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri R.K. Chaudhary, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
2. In view of order proposed to be passed, notice against respondent No.5 is dispensed with.
3. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus to ensure payment of post retiral dues in a stipulated period.
4. It is case of the petitioner that while holding the post of Cadre Secretary, he retired from service on 31.11.2017. Under the relevant regulations applicable to the case of petitioner, he is entitled for payment of post retiral dues but the same has not been released till date.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is continuously approaching to the respondents to release the post retiral dues but till date they have not passed any order. His next submission is that the amount of post retiral dues is the only source of livelihood of the petitioner after his retirement and withholding the same for no valid justification is arbitrary in nature.
6. His last submission is that in case direction is issued for consideration of claim of the petitioner to release the post retiral dues in a time bound manner, ends of justice would be met.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.4 submitted that the competent authority to consider the claim of the petitioner is member of District Level Committee, who is Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies. He further submitted that although he has not been impleaded as party in the writ petition, however, in case this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider the claim of petitioner and to pass appropriate reasoned and speaking within a reasonable period, the claim of the petitioner shall be decided accordingly.
8. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
9. In view of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served in keeping the writ petition pending.
10. Accordingly, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive representation ventilating his grievances before the competent authority within a period of ten days from today. In case such a representation is filed within aforesaid period, the competent authority shall consider the same and shall pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order to release the payment of post retiral dues of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Adarsh K Singh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Hans Nath Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 July, 2021
Judges
  • Irshad Ali