USHA VERMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In order to make out a case to grant the relief sought, a Writ Petition has to be drafted very carefully. Pleadings are essential part of any litigation. The relief sought should be supported by pleadings. The present bunch of Writ Petitions are example of it where the prayers sought are not only vague but not supported by material pleadings also. Even the Petitioners have approached this Court by not disclosing entire relevant facts, which goes adverse to their case, i.e., Petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands.

(2.) Petitioners (retired Employees or husband, father or mother of deceased Employees), as the case may be, while working in Basic Education Department, have retired or died (before or after retirement) and period goes as old as 2002 to as recent as 2023. They have not raised any demand of gratuity for many years and only in 2022 & 2023, these Writ Petitions are filed seeking relief that concerned District Basic Education Officers be directed to release and pay the Petitioners their respective amount of gratuity alongwith interest. Details of Petitioners and relation with deceased employee, date of retirement/date of death, age as on retirement/death, etc. are given hereinafter in the form of following chart: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_78_LAWS(ALL)2_2024_1.JPG</IMG>

(3.) Petitioners have claimed aforesaid relief primarily on ground that Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972") will be applicable to Teachers of Basic Schools. However, they have not disclosed that payment of Gratuity for Teachers working in these Schools are presently governed by different Government Orders. Neither relevant Government Orders, dtd. 23/11/1994, 10/6/2002 and 4/2/2004, were placed on record nor there was any averment in regard to their existence in Writ Petitions. The Writ Petitions are also silent about huge delay in claiming relief.