Fraud vitiates entitlement to pensionary benefits under the Government Resolution dated 05.02.1980.

JUDGMENT :

1. These two petitions are filed on identical issues and are raising similar questions of facts and law and hence at the request of both the parties the petitions are taken up for joint hearing and disposal. The basic facts are recorded from the lead matter being Special Civil Application No. 4473 of 2011.

2. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the petitioner is entitled to pension and other retiral benefits and to finalize the pension case of the petitioner along with other retirement benefits which include gratuity, leave encashment etc. The petitioner also claims interest on the delay in making the payment of retirement dues.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submit that the petitioner had retired in the year 2008 after attaining the age of superannuation and at the time of retirement he had rendered 27 years of service with respondent No.7, which was being managed by the respondent No.6

3.1. It is submitted that after the retirement, the petitioner was not receiving any pension and therefore made a representation to the authorities to make payment of the pension and other retirement benefits. However, such request was not granted on the ground that the school in which the petitioner was working was a non granted School and therefore benefits were not available to the teachers of non granted School. The petitioner therefore approached the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal by filing an Application No. 79 of 2009, however by an order dated 21.06.2010, the Tribunal disposed of the application with direction to the District Education Officer to consider as to whether the petitioner is entitled to pension and post retirement benefits.

3.2 It is submitted that the Education Tribunal had specifically referred to the Government Resolution dated 05.02.1980 and to the decision of this Court in case of S.D.Bhatt v/s. State of Gujarat dated 18.11.2002 in Special Civil Application No.4987 of 2002. According to the learned advocate for the petitioner, the observation made in the aforesaid decision and the provision of the Government Resolution itself cover the case of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of pension. He drew attention of this court to Government Resolution dated 05.02.1980, wherein Clause 1 specifically provides for grant of pension to the teachers, who were working with the school which was voluntarily not receiving any grant. Therefore the District Education Officer ought to have taken the decision in favour of the petitioner in this regards. Despite the aforesaid position and the direction of the Tribunal, the representation made by the petitioner was decided by an order dated 11.11.2010 (Annexure-A), which is the subject matter of challenge.

3.3 It is submitted that the impugned order is based on an erroneous fact that the petitioner has played fraud on the Government by submitting an application for General Provident Fund and such application could not have been made in view of the fact that the scheme of General Provident Fund was only for the teachers of grant in aid school and not for the teachers of non grant in aid school. It is submitted that the application for proforma form was available only for the grant in aid school and therefore made application just to clarify the status in the heading of search form in place of grant in aid school he had added word “non granted”, but there was no intention to mislead.

3.4 Learned advocate submitted that the petition is opposed on behalf of respond Nos.6 and 7 by an affidavit filed by one Manjari Nikhilbhai Goradiya, Principle of respondent No.7 School, however she herself is one of the applicants like the petitioner, who had also made the application similar to the petitioner. Moreover, the other school teachers of another school which was not grant in aid had also made such application though such teachers have been given the benefit of pension. He referred to one such applicat