Allahabad High Court
SMT. SUMAN DEVIversusU.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LTD. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
The petition is disposed of, with the Court directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation and the respondent to decide it within a stipulated period after hearing.
Summary
Smt. Suman Devi filed a writ petition seeking to quash a letter dated 24‑10‑2024 that reduced the post‑retirement dues of her husband, a former Class IV employee of U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd., and to compel the corporation to pay the full gratuity, EPF, salary arrears, leave encashment, pension, family pension, group insurance and other allowances with interest. She alleged that the corporation calculated the dues without considering her objection or affording a hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The respondents contended that the objection would be considered in accordance with law within a reasonable time. The Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation within one month, specifying the reasons for the alleged shortfall, and ordered the corporation to decide the representation within two months after hearing the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought. The order was pronounced by Justice Vikram D. Chauhan of the Allahabad High Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the corporation’s calculation and release of reduced retirement dues without hearing the petitioner violates principles of natural justice.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the full post‑retirement benefits as per applicable statutory provisions.
- Whether the Court can issue mandamus or certiorari directing payment of the disputed dues.
Subjects
- retirement dues
- gratuity
- EPF
- mandamus
- certiorari
- natural justice
- writ petition
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 3723 of 2026
Smt. Suman Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pramod K. Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Nagesh Kumar
Court No. - 34
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Nagesh Kumar, learned
counsel for respondents.
2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:
"1. To issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the
impugned letter dated 24.10.2024 (up to the extent of making "lesser payments" and
"denial of payment under some heads") issued by the respondent no. 1.
2. To issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the
respondent No. 1, to re-consider the petitioner's claim and to pay the
arrears/differences of the post retiral dues of petitioner's husband (as detailed in
Paragraph no. 37), viz. Gratuity, E.P.F. and arrears of salary, as well as to pay the
withheld dues viz. Leave encashment, arrears of pension and family pension, Group
insurance (GIS), and arrears of allowances, all on the basis of actual "revised last
drawn salary", similar to and payable to the other regular retired employees of the
corporation, along with Interest @18% PA and penal interest for delayed payment of
gratuity, from the date of retirement till the date of actual payment, as well as to
pay/release the 'family pension' regularly month to month, deciding
representation/objection dated 14.05.2025, as revised and paid, in the case of Pyare
Lal, within the stipulated period to which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.
3. To issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the
respondent No. 1, to provide a six-monthly List showing revised salary structures
(basic-pay, grade pay, DA% and annual increments) from January, 2010 till date of
death as well as the "revised last pay certificate" of the petitioner's husband."
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner's husband
was working as Class IV employee under the respondent-U.P. State Bridge
WRIA No. 3723 of 2026
2
Corporation Limited. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner's
husband has retired on 30.09.2015 and some of the retiral dues have been
released, however, quantum of the release of retiral dues is not in accordance
with law. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that lessor amount has been
released. In respect of which, petitioner has already filed an objection, which
is at page 50 of the paper book. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that
without considering the objection of the petitioner and without giving
opportunity of hearing, retiral dues have been calculated and as such,
objections raised by the petitioner are required to be considered in
accordance with law.
4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that objection of petitioner in
respect of retiral dues would be considered by respondent no.1 in accordance
with law in a time bound manner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby provided
that petitioner shall file fresh representation giving detail reasons to the
release of the lessor retiral dues within a period of one month from today
along with a certified copy of this order. In the event any such representation
is filed, respondent no.1 shall decide the same within a period of two months
thereafter after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed
of.
March 19, 2026
D. Tamang
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
DHIRENDRA TAMANG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…