Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44234 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8122 of 2025 Petitioner :- Krishna Nandan Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Housing And Urban Planning Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudheer Tripathi,Manish Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sampurna Nand Shukla Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1, and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel, who files Vakalatnama on behalf of respondents no.2 to 6. 2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is being decided finally. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite the petitioner having retired on 31.10.2023 the disciplinary proceedings that were initiated prior to his retirement are still continuing and the respondents have also not paid the retiral dues of the petitioner including the leave encashment. 4. Responding Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for respondents no.2 to 6, states that the inquiry proceedings have been completed and the inquiry report has been sent to the petitioner. He requested for a personal hearing and consequently he has also been called for a personal hearing but he has indicated his inability to attend on that date. 5.It is contended that as soon as the petitioner appears for oral hearing and after hearing him a final order would be passed by the Disciplinary Authority within a period of one month from the date the petitioner appears for oral hearing. The statement of Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel, is recorded. 6. So far as the relief of the retiral dues is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the leave eacashment of the petitioner still continues to be withheld by the respondents, although gratuity has already been paid. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents has been unable to indicate the provision of law under which leave encashment can be withheld although keeping in view Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Shivgopal and others vs. State of U.P. and others - 2019(5) ADJ 441 (FB) the gratuity could have been withheld but it has also been informed that the gratuity has been released to the petitioner. 8. Considering the aforesaid, the respondents are directed to release the leave encashment of the petitioner within a period of four weeks provided there is no legal impediment. 9. The writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 A. Katiyar Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench