Back
2001 Supreme(Guj) 799
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :H.K.RATHOD
HASMUKHRAI R.BHADIYADRA - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER - Respondent
S.C.A. 1281 of 1992
Decided On : 12/05/2001
Headnote:
Employment and Service Matter – Retirement – Claiming pensionary benefits – Petitioner was appointed as Jr. Clerk in Taluka Panchayat, he was retired on superannuation from post of Jr. Clerk; by order provisional pension and gratuity was sanctioned thereafter again, by order provisional pension was sanctioned wherein it has clearly been provided that provisional pension is sanctioned date on which final pension is sanctioned, whichever is earlier – According to petitioner, in said order, it has been mentioned that because of some administrative reasons, the final pension has not been decided – Rule was issued by this Court and it was made returnable in the month of July, 1994. Pursuant to the order an amount of commuted pension has been deposited in this Court by first respondent – Considering that fact, while issuing rule in this matter this Court has also directed registry of this Court to deposit the aforesaid amount by way of fixed deposit for a period of two years in a nationalized bank – Amount was directed to be deposited within a fortnight from – Held, Petitioner is entitled to get pensionary benefits from date on which he has become entitled for such payment with 18 per cent per annum – Respondent no. 1 and 2 are directed to immediately forward pension papers of petitioner to respondent No. 3 within fifteen days from today. As and when such pension papers of petitioner are received by respondent No. 3 from petitioner no. 1 and 2, it is directed to respondent no. 3 to immediately finalize pension papers of petitioner without any delay – Also directed to all respondents herein to pay to the petitioner the amount of pensionary benefits without any deduction and with interest thereon at the rate of 18 % p. a. from the date on which the petitioner has become entitled for such payment till actual realization thereof. Such an amount is required to be paid by the respondents to the petitioner together with interest thereon as stated above within three months from the date of finalization of pension papers of the petitioner by respondent no. 3. As per order passed by this Court while admitting this petition, registry of this Court was directed to deposit an amount in any nationalized bank which amount was deposited before this Court by the respondents as commuted pension of the petitioner – As per this Courts order said amount was ordered to be invested in any nationalized bank for a period of two years which was renewed from time to time – Now, Registry is directed to pay the said amount to the petitioner with interest accrued thereon by account payee cheque drawn in favour of the petitioner, immediately – Petition allowed. (Paras 13 and 14)
( 1 ) HEARD learned advocate Ms. S. N. Pahwa for the petitioner; Mr. K. H. Baxi, learned advocate for respondents no. 1-2 and Ms. Shraddha Trivedi, learned AGP for respondent No. 3.
( 2 ) IN this petition, rule was issued by this Court on 14. 2. 1994 and it was made returnable in the month of July, 1994. Pursuant to the order dated 10. 1. 1994, an amount of Rs. 30,357. 00 being the amount of commuted pension has been deposited in this Court by the first respondent. Considering that fact, while issuing rule in this matter on 14. 2. 1994, this Court has also directed the registry of this Court to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs. 30,357. 00 by way of fixed deposit for a period of two years in a nationalized bank. The amount was directed to be deposited within a fortnight from 14. 2. 1994.
( 3 ) BRIEF facts of the present petition are to the effect that the petitioner was appointed as Jr. Clerk in Taluka Panchayat, Botad on 10. 3. 1961; on 30. 9. 1990, the petitioner was retired on superannuation from the post of Jr. Clerk; by order dated 13. 11. 1990, provisional pension and gratuity was sanctioned from 1. 10. 1990 to 1. 10. 1991; thereafter, again, by order dated 18. 1. 1992, provisional pension was sanctioned upto 39. 9. 1992 wherein it has clearly been provided that the provisional pension is sanctioned upto 30. 9. 1992 or upto the date on which the final pension is sanctioned, whichever is earlier. According to the petitioner, in the said order, it has been mentioned that because of some administrative reasons, the final pension has not been decided. According to the petitioner, no departmental inquiry has been initiated or pending against the petitioner. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though various oral and written representations for sanctioning his final pension were made, same were not considered by the respondents. That on 18. 9. 1991, the petitioner made representation to the District Development Officer and the Taluka Development Officer and the Account Officer of Bhavnagar but the petitioner has not received any reply so far and, therefore,the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition claiming pensionary benefits from the respondents with interest. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 have filed affidavit in reply on 10th April, 1992 and 20th January, 1994. The petitioner has filed rejoinder on 14th December, 1993.
( 4 ) THE contention raised by the respondent No. 1 and 2 is to the effect that it is true that the petitioner has retired on 30. 9. 1990 from the Taluka Panchayat, Botad. The deponent who filed affidavit in reply on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and 2 has submitted that since the finalization of pension amount was likely to be delayed, provisional pension of Rs. 565. 00 p. m. as well as provisional amount of gratuity of Rs. 16,920. 34 ps. was fixed by office order No. DP. ACC. Pen. Provident Fund. 16/91 dated 9. 1. 1991 and since then, the petitioner has been receiving the amount of pension from the Sub Treasury Office, Botad. So far as the amount of provident fund is concerned, the deponent has submitted that the amount standing to the credit of the petitioner has been directed to be paid by an office order No. DP:acc:gpf858/90/88 dated 27. 12. 1990 and the same has been paid by the Taluka Panchayat, Botad under Voucher No. 3232 dated 8. 2. 1991. The deponent has further submitted that all other terminal benefits including the leave salary of the unavailed privilege leave amounting to Rs. 17,736. 00 has been paid to the petitioner by the Taluka Panchayat under Voucher No. 2161 dated 29. 10. 1990. The deponent has submitted that so far as the commuted pension amount is concerned, the petitioner is entitled to the same only after the pension case is finalized. As regards the amount of insurance, the deponent has submitted that the said amount has been sanctioned on 31. 8. 1991 and sent to the Taluka Panchayat, Botad. However, said amount has not been paid on account o
