ASHOK SINGH BHADAURIA AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. DEPTT. OF TRANSPORT LKO AND 5 OTHERS
WRIA/4926/2025 · 2025-05-07
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 138257 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 138257 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26741 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4926 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ashok Singh Bhadauria And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Transport Lko And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ghaus Beg Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. Heard Sri Ghaus Beg, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite party nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 3 to 6. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following relief:-
"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties No.3 to 5 to sanction and pay arrears of pension to petitioners in respect of their father Late Raj Bahadur Singh Bhadauria for the period 31.12.1993 to 22.11.2006 in accordance to Regulation 39 (1) (ii) of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (Other than Officers) Service Regulations, 1981 read with Government order dated 05.07.1972 issued by the State Government (opposite party no. 1)." Sri Ghaus Beg has drawn attention of this Court towards annexure no. 2, which is a letter dated 07.02.2025 preferred by the Deputy Chief Accounts Officer (Audit) to the Regional Manager, UPSRTC, Ethava seeking information in respect of the post retiral dues of late employee, Sri Raj Bahadur Singh Bhadauria the father of the petitioners. Sri Beg has submitted that the father of the petitioner was entitled for the aforesaid dues but those dues have not been paid to him, therefore, the direction may be issued to the competent authority of the UPSRTC to do the needful in terms of the letter dated
07.02.2025. Sri Ran Vijay Singh has placed reliance on the judgement of this Court in re:- State of U.P. and Another Vs. Dinesh Kumar Sharma and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 596, whereby, vide judgement and order dated 20.03.2025, the Apex Court in paragraph 19 has held that the benefit of arrears of pension, etc. is restricted up to three years prior to the date of filing writ petition. However, in the present case, the father of the petitioners retired on 31.12.1993, died on 22.11.2006 and
his wife also died on 22.07.2007 but the present writ petition has been filed after a substantial delay of about 18 years.
Sri Ghaus Beg has stated that the entitlement of the aforesaid dues accrued in the year 2013. On that learned counsel for the opposite parties have stated that even if it is accepted that the entitlement accrued in the year 2013, the petitioner should have filed writ petition within three years thereafter, so in that case too this writ petition may be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches, claiming the dues. Sri Ghaus Beg has referred the judgement of Apex Court in re:- Ram Autar Singh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. in Civil Appeal No. 13806 of 2024 arising out of SLP(C) No. 26568 of 2023, by submitting that for claiming the outstanding retiral dues, the principle of delay and latches would not be applicable for the reason that it would be recurring cause of action, however, the
learned counsel for the opposite parties have stated that the judgement in re:- Ram Autar Singh Yadav (supra) would not be applicable in the present case as the judgement in re:- Ram Autar Singh Yadav (supra) delayed claim was prayed by the employee himself, i.e., Ram Autar Singh Yadav, but in the present case, the sons of late employee who are themselves aged about 57, 53, 51 and 48 years, respectively, are claiming after a delay of 18 years. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, I find strength in the submission of Sri Ran Vijay Singh and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, that the dues so prayed in this writ petition have been claimed after a substantial delay of about 18 years, therefore, this petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is always open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Anurag Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench