Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45024 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8010 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mina Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Cooperative Societies Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha,Nirmala Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. 2. With the consent of learned counsels appearing for the contesting parties, the writ petition is finally being decided 3. At the very outset, it is pointed out that there is no respondent no. 5 in the writ petition thus the order dated 23.07.2025 indicating that no notice be issued to respondent no. 5 appears to have been wrongly transcribed. 4. The matter pertains to non grant of family pension to the petitioner since September 2022. 5. The petitioner's husband namely Shri Ram Pratap Shukla was working as Kurk Amin under the respondents no. 4. Subsequent to his death family pension has been sanctioned to the petitioner and she was in regular receipt of the same right upto August 2022 when subsequent thereto the family pension has not been paid. 6. The Court vide order dated 23.07.2025 had required learned Standing Counsel for the State to seek instructions as to why family pension has not been paid to the petitioner. 7. Today Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of the instructions sent by respondent no. 4 dated 22.07.2025 informs that on account of funds not being available it has not been found possible to pay family pension to the petitioner. It is also stated that as and when the financial position improves family pension would paid to the petitioner. 8. The aforesaid argument of Shri Singh is found to be patently fallacious in as much as it is settled position of law that financial constraints cannot be a valid ground to not pay legitimate dues to the employees, in this case it is the family pension of the employee and as such there cannot be any occasion for the respondents to not pay family pension to the petitioner and that too for a long period of time. 9. Whether the ground of financial crunch is considered a valid ground for non payment of pension and other retiral dues has already engaged the attention of this Court in the Writ A No.7811 of 2024 In Re Shiv Nath Singh & 2 Ors vs State of U.P. & 2 Ors, as affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal Defective No.208 of 2025 In Re U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) & Anr vs Shiv Nath Singh & Ors wherein this Court has held that financial crunch cannot be a valid ground for non payment of retiral dues. 10. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. A writ of mandamus is issued commanding the respondent no. 4 to pay the regular family pension to the petitioner month to month. The arrears of family pension since September 2022 till date would also be paid to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 J. K. Dinkar Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench