The Allahabad High Court has imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on the State of Uttar Pradesh for defying a judicial order issued by a co‑ordinate bench, holding the government accountable for its failure to act in accordance with binding court directions. The matter arose from a case in which the writ court had earlier directed the State government to reinstate an employee and ensure payment of her salary and pension benefits. The employee’s mother had filed a writ petition challenging her termination and withholding of post‑retiral benefits. The High Court had, in its earlier judgment, resolved the employee’s date of birth issue, restoring her to service until retirement and entitling her to full dues. That decision became final, lasting effect.
Despite the order attaining finality, the administration failed to execute the directive. The mother of the petitioner continued in service until her death before she reached superannuation, making her eligible for salary and pension benefits under the court’s ruling. Following her demise, the family sought enforcement of all dues, but the State declined to comply. This inaction prompted the petitioner to move the High Court again, seeking relief for non‑disbursement of legally mandated benefits. The special appeal filed by the State authority against the earlier writ decision was dismissed, reaffirming that the employee’s continuation in service was valid, and mandates to pay salary and pension stood.
A division bench, comprising Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Shree Prakash Singh, expressed grave concern over the State’s unwillingness to honour the judicial decree. The Court held that the denial of salary and pension benefits constituted a serious affront to the rule of law, causing financial hardship to the family of the deceased employee. The conduct of the government was characterized as willful non‑compliance, despite clarity and finality in the prior order. In the view of the Court, this amounted to disregard for the constitutional guarantee of legal sanctity and due process.
As a consequence, the High Court imposed a monetary cost of ₹1 lakh on the State of Uttar Pradesh, directing that the amount be released in favour of the petitioner along with all arrears due under the earlier judgment. The cost award was intended to both penalize dereliction of duty by public authorities and encourage adherence to judicial mandates. The Court noted that failure to implement final orders undermines public confidence in the judiciary and erodes institutional credibility.
By dismissing the special appeal filed by the State and mandating immediate payment of all outstanding benefits, the Court reaffirmed the binding nature of judicial pronouncements, particularly when they attain finality. The ruling underscored that constitutional rights such as uninterrupted service until retirement and entitlement to salary and pension cannot be thwarted by administrative inertia.
The Court’s remarks emphasized that a government’s obligation is not discharged by merely filing appeals or extending procedural delays. Once an order becomes operative and self-executing, it must be obeyed; failure to do so invites punitive costs. The bench highlighted that judicial orders impose duties that cannot be circumvented through bureaucratic lapses.
Ultimately, the Allahabad High Court’s order accomplishes two aims: it ensures that the petitioner receives all service and post‑retiral benefits due under the executed judicial order, and it imposes financial consequence on the State for defying a binding direction. The case stands as a firm assertion that constitutional and statutory mandates must be respected in both form and substance, and that administrative non‑compliance will attract judicial sanction to uphold the rule of law.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.