Summary
A Lecturer appointed in Uttar Pradesh in July 2001 died in service in August 2009, and the State refused his widow death-cum-retirement gratuity because he had not exercised the option to retire at 60; the Allahabad High Court directed payment with 8 per cent interest and the Division Bench affirmed. The Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeal with costs of Rs. 50,000: the Government Order of 16 September 2009 allowing the option to be exercised up to 1 July 2010 was issued after the employee's death, so he had no chance to exercise any option, the State did not contend that he would have been ineligible had he opted, and the gratuity is a benevolent scheme properly extended to his heirs; the practice of the State bringing such cases to the Supreme Court was deprecated.
Issues
- Whether the heirs of a lecturer who died before the Government Order permitting an option to retire at 60 was even issued can be denied death-cum-retirement gratuity for his failure to exercise that option.
Provisions considered
- Option to retire at 60 years exercisable on or before 01.07.2010, Uttar Pradesh Government Order dated 16.09.2009 on death-cum-retirement gratuityThe employee, born on 01.07.1951, would have attained 60 on 30.06.2011 and could have opted until 01.07.2010, but he died on 11.08.2009 before the order was issued; his heirs are entitled to the benefit of the order and of the gratuity scheme. (¶¶ 2.1, 4.1, 5)
Held
- There was no chance for the deceased to exercise any option, and it was not the State's case that he would have been disentitled even had he opted; the High Court rightly extended the benevolent scheme to his dependants and no interference is warranted. (¶¶ 5, 6)
Result
Appeal dismissed with costs of Rs. 50,000 payable by the State of Uttar Pradesh to the respondent within four weeks; Allahabad High Court judgment in Special Appeal No. 343 of 2021 affirming the direction to pay gratuity with 8 per cent interest upheld.