Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 86576 (ALL)

VINOD v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

WRIA/11803/2025 · 2025-08-18

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140796 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11803 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vinod Respondent :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri Purnendu Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. The petitioner has claimed himself to be one of legal heirs of Uma Shankar, who died on 24.05.2016 while working in Cawnpore Woollen Mills Branch Lal Imli. He is aggrieved that despite an assurance given by respondents way back in the year 2017 till date, amount of gratuity is not being settled. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner refers documents such as Family Member Certificate dated 24.07.2016 and an affidavit dated 30.09.2023 and subsequent representation dated 05.06.2025 that till date, his claim has not been decided. 4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that petitioner was not active towards his claim and he has specifically disclosed in representation that he has filed succession suit bearing No.390/70 of 2024, however, till date, it has not been decided, therefore, in absence of requisite documents, claim cannot be considered, however, he fairly submits that in case, petitioner has succession certificate and requisite documents, the claim may be still be considered. 5. I have considered above submissions and perused the record. 6. The petitioner is not active litigant. He was not active for last 8 years. The Court also takes note that petitioner himself filed the suit for succession which is still pending, therefore, there is still a dispute whether the petitioner is sole legal heir of deceased or not. 7. Therefore, in absence of succession certificate, claim of petitioner cannot be considered, therefore, there is no legal basis to consider the prayer of this writ petition to decide a representation, however, it is necessary to observe that in case, petitioner has succession certificate, he has liberty to raise his grievance before the concerned authority, which will be considered in accordance with law. 8. This writ petition is accordingly, dispose of with aforesaid observations. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad