Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 32327 of 2004 Petitioner :- Smt Saraswati Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,B S Pankaj,R.K. Dubey
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel is present for respondents. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record.
2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to make payment of post retiral benefits: Gratuity Rs. 70,554.00, + Difference of Revised pay Scale Rs. 9,847.00 + Encashment of Earned Leave Rs. 41,664.00 + Arrear of Pension Rs. 18,857.00 + Arrear of Difference of Revised pay + Pay Scale Rs. 1,700.00 + Family Pension for 9 months @ Rs. 1275/- per month Rs. 11,475.00 + Arrear of Bonus for two Years Rs. 4,838.00 + Insurance Rs. 5,355.00 + Difference of D.A. (About) + Rs. 5,000.00 Total Rs.1,69,270.00 + Amount of P.F. and Arrear of Installments of D.A. with interest @ 18% per annum to its earliest opportunity.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to of consider and decide the application dated 15.05.2004 (Annexure-2) of the petitioner pending before the respondent No.3 regarding post retiral benefits payment of post retiral benefits: Gratuity Rs. 70,554.00 + Difference of Revised Pay Scale Rs. 9,847.00 + Encashment of Earned Leave Rs. 41,644.00 + Arrear of Pension Rs. 18,857.00 + Arrear of Difference of Revised pay + Pay Scale Rs. 1,700.00 + Family Pension for 9 months @ Rs. 1275/- per month Rs. 11,475.00 + Arrear of Bonus for two Years. Rs. 4,838.00 + Insurance Rs. 5,355.00 + Difference of D.A. (About) + Rs.
5,000.00 Total Rs. 1,69,270.00 + Amount of P.F. and Arrear of Installments of D.A., with interest @ 18% per annum to its earliest opportunity."
3. I myself have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioner is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.
4. Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the petitioner has lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioner is absent.
5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Siddhant Sahu