RAMJEET GUPTA AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. URBAN DEVE. DEPTT. LKO AND 2 OTHERS
WRIA/10765/2025 · 2025-09-17
Abdul Moin
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164699 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164699 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 10765 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State and Sri A.P. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.2 to 5. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is being decided finally. 3. The petitioners, who are all pensioners aged between 60 to 73 years are before this Court, contending that their pension is not being paid regularly rather is being paid in a block of 6 months and the petitioners being pensioners have no other source of income other than pension so there cannot be any occasion for the pension being paid intermittently to them. 4. On the other hand, Sri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel appearing for the Jal Nigam states that on account of financial crunch with which the Jal Nigam is seized, it would not be possible to pay regular pension to the petitioners. He also states that regular pension is being paid, but there is a backlog pertaining to the pension and an endeavour has been made to pay the same also. 5. Thus, it emerges that on account of financial crisis with which the Jal Nigam is seized, regular pension is not being paid to the petitioners. 6. Whether the ground of financial crunch can be considered to be a valid ground for non payment of pension and other retiral dues has already engaged 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. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Savita Jain, Raj Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rishabh Kapoor Ramjeet Gupta And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Urban Deve. Deptt. Lko And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
7. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.
A writ of mandamus is issued commanding the respondents to make regular payment of pension every month along with D.A. The arrears of pension along with D.A. be paid with admissible interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. September 17, 2025 prateek WRIA No. 10765 of 2025 2 (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench