Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 170383 (ALL)

YATENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. MAHILA KALYAN U.P. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/12503/2024 · 2025-02-10

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8462 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12503 of 2024 Petitioner :- Yatendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Mahila Kalyan U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: "(i) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties to pay the full amount of gratuity to the petitioner on the basis of his total length of service period i.e. 34 years 11 months and 12 days (w.e.f. 18.10.1989 to 30.9.2024) on the post of Senior Clerk along with interest; (ii) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the opposite parties to pay the amount towards commutation of pension to the petitioner on the basis of his total length of service period i.e. 34 years 11 months and 12 days (w.e.t. 18.10.1989 to 30.9.2024) on the post of Senior Clerk along with interest;" 3. The petitioner was working as Junior Clerk and has retired on 30.09.2024. The petitioner was regularized vide order dated 30.06.2008. Grievance of the petitioner is that the service rendered by the petitioner on ad-hoc basis has not been counted for pensionary benefits. 4. In view of the judgment of this Court in Writ-A No.39898 of 2015 (Uma Shanker Mishra Vs. State of U.P. & Others) decided on 24.11.2022 and Writ-A No.8968 of 2022 (Dr. Shyam Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Others) decided on 17.02.2023, this Court on 22.03.2023, sought instruction from learned Standing Counsel. 5. Learned Standing Counsel, on instruction, fairly states that the judgments of this Court in the case of Uma Shanker Mishra (supra) and Dr. Shyam Kumar (supra) are applicable in the present case and controversy in hand is covered by the said judgments of this Court. 6. In view of submission advanced by learned Standing Counsel, the writ petition is allowed with direction to respondent No.2- Director of (Women Welfare) Jawahar Bhawan, 8th Floor U.P. at Lucknow to grant the pensionary benefit to the petitioner from his ad-hoc service rendered by him since 18.10.1989 with regular service. Respondent No.2 shall calculate the pension of the petitioner and other benefits and disburse the same within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 7. In case, the same is not paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid period, same shall carry simple interest @10% per annum from the date of benefit due till the date of its payment. (Alok Mathur,J.) Order Date :- 10.2.2025 V. Sinha Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench