SATYENDRA KUMAR v. U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD THRU. HOUSING COMMISSIONER LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIA/5293/2025 · 2025-05-15
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139742 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139742 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28429 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5293 of 2025 Petitioner :- Satyendra Kumar Respondent :- U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Housing Commissioner Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- Sampurna Nand Shukla Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sampurna Nand Shukla, learned counsel, who has accepted notice for opposite parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(i) To issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the opposite parties to make the payment of balance gratuity amount Rs. 6,19,820/- to the petitioner with interest at market rate, within some reasonable time. (ii) To issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the opposite parties to make the payment of interest at market rate on delayed payment of part gratuity amount Rs.13,80,180/-, made on 23.08.2023 and refunded salary amount Rs.2,81,720/- to the petitioner on 07.12.2023, within some reasonable time."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for redressal of his grievance, the petitioner has preferred representation dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure No.20) to the competent authority but to no avail. He has further submitted that the petitioner is ready to prefer a fresh representation to the Competent Authority, therefore, he may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.1 i.e., Housing Commissioner, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow and a direction may be issued to him to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner with expedition. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection if direction for disposal of the said representation is issued. 5.
Therefore, in view of the above, without entering into merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.1 i.e., Housing
Commissioner, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow ventilating his grievance taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him enclosing therewith the copy of his earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 6. It is needless to say that if there is no legal impediment, the payment of balance amount of gratuity would be paid to the petitioner within aforesaid stipulated time with interest as per law. 7. This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid terms. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench