Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10296 of 2021
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumari
Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Education And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Adarsh Singh,Indra Raj Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos. 1 & 2.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.6.2021 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Prayagraj Region, Prayagraj rejecting the claim of the petitioner for being paid the gratuity amount of her husband as well as consequential mandamus commanding the Deputy Director to release the amount of gratuity along with admissible interest to the petitioner.
The facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner Late Aadeshwar Prasad Pandey was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher in Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru Smarak Inter College, Jaari, Prayagaraj on 1.7.1997 and was later promoted as Lecturer in the said institution. The service book of the deceased husband of the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. A perusal of the service book shows that the date of birth of the husband of the petitioner was 6.7.1969.
It has been stated in the writ petition that the husband of the petitioner died on 20.2.2021 at the age of 52 years while still in service.
The petitioner filed an application for releasing the gratuity amount of her husband but the said application has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 11.6.2021 on the ground that before his death the husband of the petitioner had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years.
Despite the previous order passed by this Court, the Standing Counsel has not received instructions and it would be futile to keep the writ petition pending in view of the order proposed to be passed.
The contents of the order dated 11.6.2021 indicates that the fact regarding the employment of the husband of the petitioner in the institution is admitted in the impugned order passed by the Deputy Director. The date of birth of the husband of the petitioner as recorded in the service book shows that if he had not died while still in service, the husband of the petitioner would have retired at the age of 60 years in 2029. Evidently, the husband of the petitioner died before the last date for submitting his option for retirement at the age of 60 years.
The controversy involved in the present writ petition has been fully decided by this Court in Writ - A No. 17399 of 2019 (Usha Rani Vs. State of U.P. & 6 Others) and the judgment and order dated 24.10.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 14397 of 2019 as well as the judgement and order dated 14.5.2019 passed in Writ A No.7416 of 2019 (Smt.Sarvesh Kumari versus State of U.P and others). In view of the aforesaid judgments, the petitioner is entitled to be paid the gratuity amount due to her husband.
The Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Prayagraj Region, Prayagraj i.e., respondent no. 1 is directed to compute the amount payable to the petitioner towards gratuity of her husband within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him along with simple interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing the application for gratuity till the amount is actually disbursed, ignoring the fact that the husband of the petitioner had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years and if otherwise eligible.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 24.9.2021 Junaid