Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29087 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5375 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mithlesh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Urban Development Bapu Bhawan Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Tiwari,Atul Krishna,Varun Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Kumar Singh Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Kumar Rai, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1 to 4 and Sri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite parties No. 5 & 6. 2. The precise contention of Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 08.06.2020 has been passed after about two years from the death of the employee and this order has been communicated to the wife of deceased employee. 3. On being asked from learned counsel for opposite parties No.5 & 6 as to how and under which provision of law any impugned order causing prejudice to the deceased employee which is having civil consequences, could have been passed after the death of that employee, no explanation or provision of law could be shown to the Court. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, since the impugned order dated 08.06.2020 is erroneous on the face of it, therefore, there is no purpose to call any affidavit from the opposite parties No. 5 & 6. So the matter is being decided finally at the admission stage. 5. If, any departmental inquiry was required against the deceased employee, it could have been conducted when he was in service but after death of an employee no departmental inquiry can be conducted against such employee, therefore, pursuant to any disciplinary proceeding initiated after the death of the employee, no order can be passed causing prejudice to the deceased employee or his widow or family members. 6. The law is trite on the point that if any order is passed causing serious monitory prejudice to an employee which is having civil consequences, the appropriate action may be taken strictly in accordance with law and the procedure so prescribed but there is no provision under the law to initiate any departmental inquiry against the deceased employee and on the basis of such disciplinary proceeding, no order can be passed. 7. Therefore, the impugned order dated 08.06.2020 passed by opposite party No.6 as well as minutes of meeting dated 03.06.2020 issued by the Board are hereby set-aside/quashed. The present petitioner, who is wife of the deceased employee shall be paid all retiral dues including pension, gratuity and other consequential service benefits treating the deceased employee retired from the post of Assistant Clerk ignoring the impugned order dated 08.06.2020. 8. The petitioner would also be entitled for the interest on the delayed payment of such dues strictly in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in limini. 10. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench