Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.—Heard Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Sri I.S. Tomar, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the respondents.

Facts :

2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the petitioner was an Assistant Teacher in Primary Section attached to “Satya Narain Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Barari Baitalpur, District Deoria” which is recognized institution under the statute of Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, established under the provisions of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher for Sanskrit subject on 1.12.1977. He retired on 30.6.2010 after attaining the age of superannuation. Since during service the petitioner and other teachers were facing problem in getting salary and other benefits and as such they filed a writ petition No. Nil of 1993 which was disposed of by order dated 15.5.1993.

3. Aggrieved with that order the present petitioner and others filed a Special Appeal No. 558 of 1993 (Sant Prasad Mani and others v. State of U.P. and others) which was allowed by judgment dated 27.3.1997 holding that the facts and controversy involved is squarely covered by the judgment dated 18.1.1993 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29290 of 1990, Ramesh Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and others, 1993 ESC 360.

4. The petitioner and other teachers of the aforesaid institution were being paid salary as per provisions of Payment of Salary Act 1971. The exemption from training was also granted to the petitioner and fixation of salary was made by order of the Joint Director of Education 7th Division, Gorakhpur dated 20.11.2009. Since pension was not granted to the petitioner after retirement and as such the petitioner filed a Writ A No. 45447 of 2012 which was disposed of by order dated 7.9.2012 as under:

“Petitioner is said to have attained the age of superannuation, but till date pension has not been ensured to him, whereas during continuance in service, he had functioned in the pensionable department. Such grievance of the petitioner can be very well looked into, examined and remedied by by the Joint Director of Education, VII Region, Gorakhpur.

Consequently, Joint Director of Education, VII Region, Gorakhpur is directed to consider the claim of petitioner and take appropriate decision, in accordance with law by means of reasoned and speaking order, within next three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.”

5. Pursuant to the aforequoted order of this Court, the Joint Director of Education 7th Division, Gorakhpur passed the impugned order dated 1.12.2012 whereby the representation of the petitioner was rejected holding as under:

fu.kZ;

^^lgk;rk izkIr laLd`r ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa@egkfo|ky;ksa ds layXu izkFkfed vuqHkkx esa lsokjr ,oa vuojr osru Hkqxrku IkzkIr djrs gq, lsokfuo`RRk f'k{kdksa ds isa'kujh ykHkksa ds ns;rk ds lEcU/k esa dksbZ 'kklukns'k ,oa foHkkxh; vkns'k tkjh u gksus dh fLFkfr esa ;kph ekjd.Ms; ef.k dk izR;kosnu fnukad 15-9-2012 ,oa rRØe esa bl gLrk{kjdrkZ ds dk;kZy; esa fnukad 26-9-2012 dks izkIr ;kph dk izR;kosnu fujLr dj fUkLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA

,rn~}kjk ;kfpdk la[;k 45447@2012 esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn ds ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 7-9-2012 ds vuqikyu esa izdj.k dk fUkLrkj.k fd;k tkrk gSA**

Aggrieved with this order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

Submissions on behalf of Petitioner

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as under:

(i) The petitioner is entitled for all post retiral benefits including pension in terms of the Division Bench Judgement in the case of Sant Prasad Mani (supra) in which the petitioner was the appellant No. 3.

(ii) In view of directions issued by this Court in the case of Ramesh Upadhyay (supra) the petitioner is entitled to all post retirement benefits which are available to teachers of Primary Sections attached to High School