Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 182169 (ALL)

ASIFA BANO v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. P.W.D. U.P. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/13029/2025 · 2025-11-11

Shree Prakash Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13029 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the respondent-corporation and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State. Present petition has been filed with the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the post retiral dues of the husband of the petitioner and family pension including arrears of family pension to the petitioner forthwith. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the interest on the amount of the post retiral benefits of the husband of the petitioner to her for delayed period upto actual payment is made." The petitioner is a widow whose husband died on 9.3.2017 and as per the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the family pension as well as the retiral dues have not been paid yet. Mr. Shishir Jain, learned counsel appearing for the respondent corporation submitted that the son of the earlier wife has instituted a civil suit before the Civil Court being Civil Suit No. 429 of 2017 which is still pending consideration. He submitted that the petitioner after 2017 has approached the Department in October 2025. Be that as it may, without entering into merits of the case, the petitioner is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Alok Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shishir Jain Asifa Bano .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. P.W.D. U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) given liberty to move fresh representation while making her claim regarding the family pension and arrears of family pension including the retiral dues before the respondent no.2 within fifteen days and if such claim is raised within aforesaid period of time, the respondent no.2/Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. shall consider and decide the same within further period of six weeks. Needless to say that if the authorities reach to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to payment of family pension and arrears of family pension including other retiral dues, the same shall be paid. With the aforesaid observations, present petition is disposed of. November 11, 2025 Ram Murti WRIA No. 13029 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench