Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Prof. Retired Ravi Gunthe, S/o. Lt. Sh. V.n. Gunthe – Appellant
Versus
Jnvu, Through Registrar, Jodhpur – Respondent
ORDER :
FARJAND ALI, J.
1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent-University to release his last month’s salary, arrears of salary for 2 months and 12 days, pension, gratuity, commutation, leave encashment, arrears of selection grade under CAS, and provident fund. The petitioner has also sought interest on the delayed amounts at the rate of 18% per annum from 31.08.2017 until actual payment and, additionally, seeks that respondents 2 to 5 be held personally liable for their alleged illegal and irresponsible actions.
2. The facts relevant and necessary for disposal of the instant Writ Petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur, vide appointment letter dated 01.10.1984, and assumed charge on 07.11.1984. His services were regularized in 1986, and he was promoted to Associate Professor in 1988 and subsequently to Professor in 2001, with seniority reckoned from his prior service. On 17.08.2015, he was designated as Head of the Department (HOD) of Psychology and continued in this capacity until his retirement o
Arbitrary delay in disbursement of retiral benefits violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, necessitating judicial directions for timely payment and interest on delayed amounts.
Retirees are entitled to claim interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits, emphasizing constitutional rights and established judicial precedents.
Each party should take responsibility for their mistakes and not set off their mistakes on the other party.
The Tribunal erred in attributing delay in pension payment to the petitioner; interest at 6% is due under Clause-5 of the government resolution for delayed retiral benefits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the violation of DCRB guidelines by the respondent No.3, leading to the delay in processing the petitioner's retiral benefits, and the court's dire....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
