In CIVIL APPEAL No 3639 of 2022-SC- Death-cum-retirement gratuity is benevolent scheme extended to heirs/dependent of deceased employee: SC
Justices M.R. Shah & B.V. Nagarathna [09-02-2023]

Read Order: STATE OF U.P. AND ORS V. SMT. PRIYANKA

Mansimran Kaur

New Delhi, February 15, 2023: The deathcum-retirement gratuity is the benevolent scheme and should be implied effectively, the Supreme Court has observed.

The Division bench of Justice M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathana dismissed the instant petition by stating that the facts and circumstances of the present case do not call for interference of this Court. 

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in a Special Appeal by which the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the said appeal and  confirmed the judgment and order passed by the Single Judge directing the appellants – State of U.P. and Ors. to pay the gratuity to the original writ petitioner on the death of the deceased employee (her husband), the State of U.P. and Ors. preferred the present appeal.

Factual matrix of the case was such that the deceased employee Dr. Vinod Kumar, husband of the original writ petitioner, was working as Lecturer. He joined service on July 2, 2001 and died on August 11, 2009 while in service. The original writ petitioner - wife of the deceased employee applied for payment of gratuity due to her husband, but the same was rejected on the ground that the husband of the petitioner, while in service, had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years. The original writ petitioner therefore filed the writ appeal before the High Court .

The Single Jude of the High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the appellants to compute the amount payable to her husband towards gratuity quantified in accordance with the relevant Government orders with the interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of the application for gratuity till the amount is actually disbursed, ignoring the fact that the husband of the original writ petitioner had not opted for retirement at the age of 60 years.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the Single Judge, the appellants preferred the writ appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said appeal, hence the present appeal.

After extensively, considering the submissions of the parties, the Court  noted that The High Court  rightly observed that the respondent would be entitled to the benefit of the Government Order dated  September 16, 2009 and would be entitled to the benefit of death-cum-retirement gratuity being the heirs of the deceased employee. 

In furtherance of the same, the Court noted, “the  deathcum-retirement gratuity is the benevolent scheme and the same is extended to the respondent being heirs/dependent of the deceased employee by the Single Judge, confirmed by the Division Bench. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no interference of this Court is called for”. 

In view of the above, the present appeal failed and was accordingly dismissed.