Court No. - 16
1. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23401 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rishi Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Lal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sujit Kumar Rai
2. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23409 of 2018 Petitioner :- Gulam Sabir Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Lal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sujit Kumar Rai
3. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23406 of 2018 Petitioner :- Arif Jamal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Lal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Sujit Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
(Oral)
1. The petitioner has prayed for a Mandamus to the respondents to immediately release the balance amount of Gratuity which has been illegally withheld by the respondent authorities with interest for the inordinate delay and compensation etc. within stipulated time frame and for a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of petitioner in accordance with law by reasoned and speaking order.
2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is a retired employee of District Cooperative Bank Limited, Bijnor and the respondent Bank has applied a ceiling limit of Rs. 10 lac for the petitioner as well although the total amount of Gratuity payable to him under Regulation 95 of the U.P. Cooperative Employees Service Regulation 1975 is much more.
3. It has been submitted that in similar matters this Court has already held that the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act and Regulations are special provision governing the employees of Cooperative Societies and general Government Orders/Rules would not apply and even Payment of Gratuity Act would not apply. He has referred to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions the leading case of which was W.P. No. 14364 of 2016 (Sugvir Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 03.08.2016 which has been relied upon by another Division Bench in Writ - A 18561 of 2018: Maharaj Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others decided on 10.09.2018 Shri Sujeet Kumar Rai appearing for the respondents says that there is no factual dispute in the matter and the petitioner be given the benefit of judgment already rendered in favour of similar employees by this Court.
4. In view of what has been submitted before this Court by the counsel for both the parties the writ petition is disposed off by directing the respondent No. 2 to pay the petitioner the Gratuity in terms of Regulation 95 of the U.P. Cooperative Employees Service Regulation 1975 without putting any ceiling limit of Rs.
10 lac as provided under the Payment of Gratuity Act in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order.
5. All the three writ petitions stand disposed off.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 LBY