Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18135 of 2021 Petitioner :- Smt. Kamlesh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Kesherwani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhola Nath Yadav
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
Heard Sri Kamal Kumar Kesherwani, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 to 3 and Sri Bhola Nath Yadav, learned counsel for respondent nos.4, 5 & 6.
The petitioner in the present writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(a). Issue a writ, order or issuing a Writ of Certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 30.09.2021 (Annexure No.1) passed by the Respondent No.5, by which the amount of gratuity claimed by petitioner of her husband has been refused to pay (name of the petitioner mention at serial no. 14 in the order impugned).
(b). Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondents to pay the amount of death-cum retirement gratuity of petitioner's husband to the petitioner along with admissible interest forthwith.
(c). 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.
(d). Allow this writ petition and award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
Husband of the petitioner Yashpal Singh was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher and was promoted in Senior basic Education on the same post and died on 07.02.2008 during the service period. The respondent-authority by order dated 30.09.2021 has denied the gratuity to petitioner on the ground that husband of the petitioner had not opted for payment of gratuity during the service period, and therefore, she is not eligible for gratuity.
Learned counsel for the petitioner while challenging the aforesaid order 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 ground stated in the impugned order for rejecting the claim of petitioner for release of gratuity 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 impugned order dated 30.09.2021, annexure 1 to the writ petition, is quashed and writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgement of this Court in the case of Usha Rani (supra).
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Ravi/-