HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 15168 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Brijendra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent/ opposite party no. 1 and Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent/ opposite party nos. 2 and 3. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to calculate and release the petitioner's gratuity strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by counting his continuous service from his initial appointment on 17.04.1984 until his retirement on 31.10.2016. Further direct the respondents to prepare and furnish a complete and duly certified calculation sheet showing the computation of gratuity in accordance with the Act and in conformity with the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Writ-C No. 24841 of 2016. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay statutory interest on the delayed payment of gratuity under Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 from the date gratuity became payable until the date of actual payment. iii. Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. iv. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner in the interest of justice." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to prefer a fresh representation to the Competent Authority, therefore, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Pratap Singh, Kushagra Kanodia Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Surendra Kumar Singh Saudan Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Krishi Vipran And Videsh Vyapar Anubhag 1 Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) he may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.2, i.e., Director, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Prishad, U.P. at Kisan Mandi Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and a direction may be issued to him to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner with expedition. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection if direction for disposal of the said representation is issued. 5. Therefore, in view of the above, without entering into merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.2, i.e., Director, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Prishad, U.P. at Kisan Mandi Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow ventilating his grievance taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him enclosing therewith the copy of his earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 6. It is need less to say that if there is no legal impediment, the payment of gratuity would be paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, failing which the petitioner would be entitled for the interest on the delayed payment. However, if there is delay in making payment of gratuity, the claim of the petitioner fore interest may also be considered in the light of statutory prescriptions. December 19, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 15168 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench