HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 12019 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3. Instant petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "[1] Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus' thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties specially opposite party no. 2 i.e. Director, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad at Kisan Mandi Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow to extend the benefit to the petitioner for the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and to pay the gratuity amount in accordance with Provisions of the Act after duly re-calculating the remaining period of service which has been rendered by the petitioner from 01.05.1984 to 11.01.2008, in the interest of justice. [II] Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus' thereby commanding and directing to the opposite parties to pay the balance gratuity amount along with interest as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on delayed payment, in the interest of justice." Learned counsel for the respondent Mandi Parishad submits that payment of gratuity Act, 1972 is not applicable to the services of the petitioner and rather the Government Order dated 22.6.1987 would attract regarding payment of gratuity. He submits that the petitioner has prayed for payment of gratuity as per the provisions of the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vyas Narayan Shukla, Shailesh Kumari, Syed Shabab Haider Zaidi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Surendra Kumar Singh Pahalwan Verma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Krishi Vipran And Videsh Vyapar Anubhag -I Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that any change in the provisions at the level of Mandi Parishad would be subject to Section 5 of Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 and, therefore, in this view of the matter, the Government Order dated 22.6.1987 is redundant. After the aforesaid arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that interest of justice would be subserved, if this Hon'ble Court may be given liberty to the petitioner to move an application before the respondent no.2/ Deputy Director (Admn./Marketing), Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parisahd, while claiming payment of gratuity under the applicable laws and the respondent no.2 is directed to consider and decide the same within time fixed. Learned counsel for the respondent Mandi Parishad has no objection to the submission aforesaid. Be that as it may, without entering into merits of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to make a fresh representation while claiming of payment of gratuity under the relevant laws, within 15 days and in case such representation is made, the respondent no.2, Deputy Director (Admn./Marketing), Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parisahd is directed to consider and decide the same, within a period of two month, from the date of production of certified copy of this order before him. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. October 15, 2025 Ram Murti WRIA No. 12019 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench