IMPORTANT POINT
Voluntary retirement constitutes an option for gratuity eligibility, regardless of not opting to retire at the age of 60.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Manjive Shukla, J.-Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by non-payment of gratuity on her retirement therefore, has filed this writ petition praying therein for a direction from this Court thereby commanding the respondents to pay her gratuity alongwith interest.

3. Brief facts of the case are that Sri Ram Janki Vidya Mandir Balika Vidyalaya, Rajapur, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as ''school'') is recognized by U.P. Basic Education Board and is receiving grant-in-aid from the Government of U.P. Petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in the school vide appointment order dated 4.9.1989 and she joined on her post in the month of September, 1989.

4. Petitioner continued to work on her post to the utmost satisfaction of her superiors. Petitioner's date of birth is 20.1.1963. Petitioner submitted an application for voluntary retirement which was allowed by the District Basic Education Officer vide order dated 15.1.2022 thereby petitioner has been permitted to retire w.e.f. 31.3.2022. Pursuant to aforesaid order dated 15.1.2022, petitioner has retired from service on 31.3.2022 on completion of 59 years 2 months and 10 days of age.

5. After retirement of the petitioner, papers for payment of post-retiral dues were duly forwarded by the Manager of the Committee of Management of the school. Petitioner has been paid all of her post retiral dues except gratuity.

6. Petitioner in her writ petition has stated that she has been orally told by the Respondent No. 3 that since she has not submitted option to retire at the age of 60 years which is mandatory for payment of gratuity, she is not entitled for the payment of gratuity.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that initially State Government has issued a Government Order on 23.11.1994 whereby it was provided that the age of retirement of a teacher working in a Junior High School is 60 years but those teachers who submit their option to retire at the age of 58 years shall be entitled for payment of gratuity. Thereafter State Government issued another Government Order on 10.6.2002 whereby it has been provided that teachers can submit option to retire at the age of 58 years, one year before the date of his retirement i.e. on 1st of July of the Academic Session in which he has to retire and further if a teacher gives option to retire at the age of 58 years, he can change his option till the date of his retirement. It has further been submitted that as per her date of birth, petitioner was to complete 60 years of age on 19.1.2023 and 62 years of age on 19.1.2025. Petitioner about two years before the date of completion of 60 years of age submitted an application on 29.6.2021 whereby she requested the District Basic Education Officer to permit her to voluntary retire from service.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the application for voluntary retirement by the petitioner on 29.6.2021 was in-fact her option to retire from service even before completion of 60 years of service and the said application/option has been accepted by the District Basic Education Officer, Varanasi vide his order dated 15.1.2022 and once petitioner has been permitted to retire before completion of 60 years of service, she is entitled for the payment of gratuity.

9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court towards provisions made in Fundamental Rule 56(e) of the Financial Handbook wherein it is provided that if a Government servant retires from service, he shall be entitled for payment of pension and other retiral benefits and thus has submitted before this Court that once petitioner has been permitted to retire from service, she cannot be deprived of her right to receive amount of gratuity. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further invited attention