Employee's Salary And Pension Withheld Despite Judicial Order: Allahabad High Court Imposes ₹1 Lakh Cost On State
On Monday, the Allahabad High Court imposed cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the State of U.P. for defying orders of the coordinate bench by not letting the mother of the petitioner continue in service despite the order of the High Court having attained finality.Petitioner's mother had earlier filed a writ petition before the High Court wherein the issue regarding her date of birth was settled and it...
On Monday, the Allahabad High Court imposed cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the State of U.P. for defying orders of the coordinate bench by not letting the mother of the petitioner continue in service despite the order of the High Court having attained finality.
Petitioner's mother had earlier filed a writ petition before the High Court wherein the issue regarding her date of birth was settled and it was directed that she continue to be in service. However, since after her death, post retiral dues were not being disbursed, petitioner approached the High Court.
The writ court ordered in favour of the petitioner giving all service and post-retiral benefits. Subsequently, the State filed a special appeal against the order of the writ court.
The Court held that the order in the earlier writ petition had attained finality and therefore, the mother was liable to continue in service till her death (which was before her date of superannuation) and was liable to get all service benefits. It was held that the act of the State in withholding her salary and pension had caused great financial loss to the family.
The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Shree Prakash Singh held,
“Taking note of the fact that the family of the deceased employee was subjected to a heavy and grave financial loss despite the judgment dated 26.8.2015 having attained finality, we hereby proceed to impose a cost of rupees one lakh upon the State which shall be released in favour of the respondent herein along-with all other benefits in terms of the directions issued by the writ court.”
Accordingly, the special appeals filed by the State were dismissed.
Case Title: State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others v. Mukhtar Ahmad 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 286 [SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 313 of 2025]
Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 286