1

RC/

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No. 1138 of 2013

With

W.P.(S) No. 1394 of 2018

Dr. (Mrs.) Veena Sharma

… … … Petitioner

[In W.P.(S) No. 1138 of 2013]

Dr. (Mrs.) Beena Sharma

… … … Petitioner

[In W.P.(S) No. 1394 of 2018]

V E R S U S

1. The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, Government of

Jharkhand, Ranchi

2. The Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand,

Ranchi

3. The Director, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

4. Bharat Sewak Samaj Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Dhanbad, Rajendra Path,

Dhanbad, through its Secretary.

5. The Vinova Bhave University, Hazaribagh.

… … … Respondents

[In both writ petitions]

CORAM : HON'BLE DR JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK

For the Petitioner

Mr. Dipak Dubey, Advocate

For the State

Mr. Apoorva Singh, AC to SC (Mines)-II

Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, AC to Sr. SC-III

For the V.V. University

Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, Advocate

W.P.(S) No. 1138 of 2013

09/25.01.2023

At the very outset Mr. Dipak Dubey, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that petitioner has already retired in the year 2017 and as

such W.P.(S) No. 1138 of 2013 has now become infructuous.

Learned counsel for the respondents do not oppose submission of

learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of fair submission of learned counsel for the petitioner,

W.P.(S) No. 1138 of 2013 stands dismissed as infructuous.

W.P.(S) No. 1394 of 2018

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction

upon the respondents to pay remaining post retiral benefits on account of

leave encashment and gratuity pursuant to retirement of petitioner on

01.03.2017.

2

RC/

Mr. Dipak Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner has already superannuated on 01.03.2017 and thereafter

pensionary and other benefits have already been extended to her but till date

benefits towards leave encashment and gratuity has not been paid to her.

Learned counsel fairly submits that a direction be given to the respondents

for payment of leave encashment and gratuity.

Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, AC to learned Sr. SC-III appearing for the

State submits that State has no role in the instant matter. It is the Governing

Body of the College concerned who is responsible to look into the matter.

Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, learned counsel representing University

submits that the University has no role to play regarding payment of amount

towards gratuity and leave encashment.

From the arguments advanced by respective parties, it appears that

services of the petitioner was regularized in the year 1989 itself. After her

retirement in the year 2017, petitioner has already received pensionary

benefits along with other terminal benefits. Petitioner has represented before

the authorities for payment of amount towards gratuity and leave

encashment. Admittedly, petitioner was working in the affiliated College

and when she is already receiving pensionary benefits, she is also entitled

for amount towards gratuity and leave encashment.

Let the petitioner file fresh representation before the Governing Body

of the College concerned, who, after considering facts and circumstances

and entitlement of the petitioner, shall look into the matter and if it is found

that petitioner is entitled for the said benefits, the same be forwarded to the

University. If it is found that petitioner is entitled for the said benefits, the

University shall recommend the case before the State for release of funds

and needful. However, if it is found that petitioner is not entitled for the

benefits, the same be communicated to her with reasoned order.

With the aforementioned observations and directions, W.P.(S) No.

1394 of 2018 stands disposed of.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)