Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SMT. MITHLESH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the District Inspector of School for relief, without expressing any opinion on the merits.

Summary

Smt. Mithlesh Singh filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to pay her death‑cum‑retirement gratuity with interest, and also directing the District Inspector of School (Respondent No.3) to decide a representation dated 24‑08‑2026. The respondents contended that the grievance should be addressed by the District Inspector and offered no objection to a direction for expeditious disposal of the representation. The High Court held that the petition did not serve any useful purpose and that the appropriate forum for relief was the administrative authority, i.e., the District Inspector. Accordingly, the Court ordered the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Inspector within three weeks, attaching a certified copy of the order, and directed the Inspector to decide it within two months. The writ petition was disposed of without any comment on its merits.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate forum for redressing the petitioner's grievance regarding death‑cum‑retirement gratuity?
  • Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition or direct the petitioner to exhaust the administrative remedy before the District Inspector of School?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • mandamus
  • death-cum-retirement gratuity
  • administrative remedy
  • exhaustion of remedies
  • High Court
  • District Inspector of School
  • disposal

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                           WRIT - A No. - 14941 of 2026

Smt. Mithlesh Singh
                                                                 .....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                              .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                       :   R.B. Singh Parmar
Counsel for Respondent(s)                       :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 32
                     HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents and perused the record on Board.

2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:

     "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
     commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pay the
     amount death- cum- retirement gratuity to the petitioner
     alongwith with @ 9% per annum interest on the delay payment of
     amount of death- cum- retirement gratuity from the date of death
     of husband of petitioner till the date of actual payment.


     (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
     commanding and directing the respondent No.-3 to decide the
     representation dated- 24.08.2026 filed by the (Annexure No.-7) to
     this writ petition.


     (iii) issue such other and further order or direction as this
     Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper under the facts and
     circumstance of the case"

3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 5 has
contended that the grievance of the present petitioner raised in the instant
writ petition can more appropriately be redressed by the respondent no. 3
District Inspector of School (Respondent no. 3) and that he has no objection
if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the fresh representation, to
                                                                                             WRIA No. 14941 of 2026
                                                                    2

                                    be moved by the present petitioner, within such stipulated period, as may be
                                    directed by this Court.

                                    5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
                                    keeping this matter pending. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
                                    finally dispose of the present writ petition, without expressing any
                                    opinion on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioner to
                                    move a fresh representation before the District Inspector of School
                                    (respondent no. 3) ventilating his grievances, as raised in this petition,
                                    within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of
                                    this order and a self attested copy of the instant writ petition, who, in turn,
                                    shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously,
                                    preferably, within a period of two months from the date of production of
                                    the same, if there is no other legal impediment.

                                    6. With the aforesaid directions and observations, present writ petition
                                    stands disposed of.



                                                                                              (Dinesh Pathak,J.)
                                    September 17, 2026
                                    Israr




Digitally signed by :-
ISRAR AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.