Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66513 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16363 of 2022 Petitioner :- Smt. Priyadarshani Sharma Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandan Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: "a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 28.05.2022 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), First Division, Meerut/respondent no.3 whereby the claim of petitioner for payment of death cum retirement gratuity of her husband has been rejected (Annexure-'1' to this writ petition); b) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to pay death cum retirement gratuity of late husband of the petitioner namely Sanjay Kumar Sharma who passed away during the service period on 01.12.2018;" 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that claim of petitioner for death cum retirement gratuity of the husband of petitioner, who was working on the post of Assistant Teacher, has been rejected by impugned order dated 28.5.2022 on the ground that petitioner has not exercised option of 62 or 60 years of age. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that husband of petitioner has died prior to age of 60 years and as such, the matter is covered by the law laid down by this Court in Writ-A No.9105 of 2021 (Sushila Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and 5 others) decided on 15.09.2021. Paragraph 39 of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereinbelow: "39. Viewed in light of the above, it is manifest that the decision in Usha Rani appears to have rightly taken the position that gratuity cannot be denied in a situation where a teacher dies prior to reaching the age of retirement and the death having occurred a year before the age of retirement was being reached. The various Government Orders which have been referred to by the respondents far from casting a shadow of doubt on the correctness of the judgment in Usha Rani buttress and support the conclusions recorded therein. For all the aforesaid reasons, the stand of the respondents that the petitioners here would not be entitled to gratuity consequent to a failure on the part of the deceased teacher having failed to exercise an option would not sustain." 4. Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the law laid down by this Court in Sushila Yadav (supra) and submits that subsequently, the Government Order dated 14th June 2023 has been issued in compliance of the judgment of this Court. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the matter may be remanded back to authority concerned. 5. In view of aforesaid, the impugned order dated 28.5.2022 passed by respondent no.3-Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), First Division, Meerut is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to respondent no.3 for deciding the claim of petitioner afresh in light of the judgment of this Court in Sushila Yadav (supra) and consequent Government Order dated 14th June 2023 within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 D. Tamang Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad