Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LALTA PRASAD MAURYA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Lalta Prasad Maurya v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 15125 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9994 (22 May 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 52

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15125 of 2006

Lalta Prasad Maurya

Versus

State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V. K. Shukla, J.

Petitioner retired on 31.07.2004. His post retiral benefits and monthly pension was not being ensured, and  in these circumstances, petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by means of present writ petition. On presentation of writ petition, this court on 20.03.2006 passed following order:

"Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 4

The petitioner retired from service on 31.7.2004. The grievance of the petitioner is that  he has not been paid post retiral benefits and monthly pension as yet by the respondents.

An employee is entitled to get retiral/post death benefits, for which formalities have to be got completed before the                                                                                      date of retirement/after the death in harness  of the employee. Non-payment of retiral/post death  dues is hit by Article 21 of the Constitution.

In these circumstances, the respondents  are directed either to pay the retiral dues of the petitioner with 10 per cent compound interest from due  date till the date date of payment within a period of 6 weeks from today or they may show case within two months by filing counter affidavit within the time allowed by this Court. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 shall be personally present in Court on the date fixed.

List on 22.05.2006."

Pursuant to order passed by this Court, counter affidavit has been filed, and in paragraph 5 thereof following statement of fact has been mentioned, which is being quoted below:

"5. That the contents of paragraph no.4 and 5 of the Writ petition are not correct. as stated hence denied. At this stage deponent submits as follows:

i) That the petitioner Lalta Prasad Maurya was an employee in the Department of Water Works in Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaunpur, who retired from his service and Rs.7500 was paid to him towards his provident fund, which was to the tune of Rs.15,546/-. The balance of provident fund which has to be paid to him is Rs.8,064/-.

ii). That the total payment which was to be paid towards earn leave to the petitioner is Rs.33,774. Rs.6,000/- was paid to the petitioner on 05.05.2000 and Rs.27,774/- has been paid through account payee cheque dated 24.04.2006 and thus nothing remains to be paid more to the petitioner towards earn leave.

iii) That Rs.8,194/- has been paid to the petitioner towards revise pay scale of year 1996 to 1998. This amount was paid to the petitioner time to time and last amount Rs.6444/- was paid through account payee cheque dated 24.04.2004.

That for sanction of pension and gratuity, the paper relating to the petitioner has already been sent to the Office of Director, Asthaniya Nidhi Lekha Pariksha, Varanasi on 31.03.2005, but uptill now the same has not been sanctioned despite sending reminder on 29.12.2005. the paper relating to Insurance Claim has already been sent to the office of Director Asthaniya Nikaya, U.P. Lucknow on 30.11.2004 but still the same has not been sanctioned. the true copy of the detail of the payment in relation to the petitioner has been prepared by Accountant of Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaunpur is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. CA -1 to this affidavit."

Details set out in the counter affidavit clearly indicates that pension and gratuity amount till date have not been paid. Qua other amount it has been mentioned that payment has been made. The Director, Local Bodies is directed to take final decision  to ensure the payment of pension and gratuity to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.  Needless to say that 10% compound interest from due date to the actual date of payment shall also be paid on the total amount payable to the petitioner except on gratuity amount where statutory interest is payable, and  in case no statutory interest, then the interest mentioned above.

In terms of above direction and observation writ petition stands disposed of.

22.05.2006

SRY  


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.