Back
J. J. MUNIR
Rahimun – Nisha – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner is the widow of a Class-IV employee, who superannuated from the services of the Nagar Palika Parishad, Bindki, District Fatehpur, as a Daftari on 05.01.1995. She has not been paid the post retiral benefits due on account of her husband's services, including family pension till date. This is the case that the petitioner has come up with before this Court, praying for the issue of a mandamus directing the respondents to sanction and disburse the post retiral benefits due on account of her husband's services.
2. Heard Mr. Sudheer Rana, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rahul Pandey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.4 and Mr. Vimla Prasad, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.
3. According to the petitioner, her husband, Mubarak Hussain, retired as a Daftari, a Class-IV employee with the Nagar Palika Parishad, Bindki, District Fatehpur. He retired on 05.01.1995, and passed away within the course of a year, on 16.12.1995. His services were acknowledged by the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, with the Palika, passing a condolence resolution showering encomiums. Still, the petitioner's post retir
The prohibition of recovery of emoluments paid for work rendered by an employee, even if beyond entitlement, as it would amount to begar, prohibited under Article 23 of the Constitution.
An employer cannot recover salaries paid for work rendered by an employee beyond their retirement age if the employee was allowed to continue working based on the date of birth recorded in their serv....
Employers have a duty to conclude disciplinary proceedings before an employee's retirement, and delays in post-retiral benefit payments can incur interest liability.
Interest on delayed post-retiral benefits and accountability for bureaucratic negligence established, mandating 6% interest due to culpable delays.
Retiral benefits are constitutional rights that cannot be denied without due process, and unproven allegations of forgery do not justify withholding such benefits.
Point of Law : It is clear like a noon day that the retiral dues of an employee like petitioner cannot be allowed to withhold because the documents were not received by any department from other depa....
Recovery of excess payments from the widow of a Class-III employee post-mortem is impermissible under law, reaffirming the principle established in Rafiq Masih case.
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
