AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravindra Maithani, J
Petitioner claims interest for delayed payment of retiral dues.
It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was Forester with the respondents department. He superannuated on 31.08.2018. His dues were not paid on time. Subsequently, they were paid in the year 2020. But interest as admissible, has yet not been paid.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
At the very outset, the Court wanted to know from the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to why should this Court entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the availability of alternate efficacious remedy from the State Public Services Tribunal, as constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he restricts his submission to the extent that the respondents be directed to decide the representation dated 10.07.2021 (part of Annexure No.8 to the writ petition), submitted by the petitioner within the given time.
On behalf of the State, a statement is given that the representation dated 10.07.2021, will be decided by the respondents within a period of four weeks from today.
The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel.
The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents, to decide the representation dated 10.07.2021 (part of Annexure No.8 to the writ petition), within a period of four weeks from today. But, in case, the dispute is still not resolved, even after consideration of the representation, any writ petition, on the subject, shall not be entertained by this Court merely on the ground that it is in sequel to the instant writ petition.