Back
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI
Paramjit Kaur – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus for quashing of the impugned order dated 07.01.2020 (Annexure P-2) and order dated 19.11.2019 (Annexure P-3) vide which an order has been made to recover an amount of Rs.1,36,640/- from the petitioner alleging wrong fixation of his pay.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a case where the petitioner had retired as a Craft Teacher on 31.01.2019 and the said post falls under Category-III. He submitted that after the retirement, the petitioner was paid only leave encashment and GP fund but pension and gratutity has not been paid till date and there is no reason or justification with the State to not have paid the same to the petitioner. He submitted that as per Annexure P-2 a letter was written by the Executive Officer, Panchyat Samiti, Baghapurana to the petitioner in which it has been so stated that while she was in service and when her pay was fixed with effect from 01.01.2006 then inadvertently the Grade Pay of Rs.3600/- in place of Grade Pay of Rs.3200/- was fixed and in this way
non-payment of leave salary and pension to retired employees is deprivation of a citizen in right to property. Such deprivation is violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 and Cons....
Pension is a valuable right protected under Article 300A of the Constitution, and cannot be denied without due process. Recovery from a deceased employee's benefits is unlawful without established li....
Withholding gratuity post-retirement without notice or opportunity to contest alleged incorrect pay fixation is impermissible and deemed harsh.
Pension and gratuity cannot be withheld without proper proceedings and findings of misconduct; Rule 43(c) requires adherence to principles of natural justice.
No disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner. Under such circumstances, withholding of retirement benefits under the guise of the impugned Memo is unjust, arbitrary.
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
