Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PANNA LAL versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Panna Lal v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 43348 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 5365 (26 March 2007)

 

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. 1

Civil Misc. Writ Petitioner No. 43348 of 2006

Panna Lal

Vs.

State of U.P. & others

Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pradeep Kumar appearing for Nagar Palika Parishad, Etawah and learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

The petitioner retired as a class-IV employee of Nagar Palika Parishad, Etawah on 30.4.1995. He has filed this writ petition raising the grievance that he has not been paid his post retirement benefits. The respondent No.5 has filed as short counter affidavit stating that the amount of post retirement benefits payable to the petitioner has been deposited by the Nagar Palika Parishad in the State Consolidated Retirement Employees Fund i.e. account no. 01000006612 maintained with State Bank of India, Main Branch, Etawah on 8.9.2006.  However, learned counsel for the petitioner states that though he has been paid all other retirement dues but part of arrears of pension and gratuity has not yet been paid and transferred to his pension account.

Ordinarily, the entire pension amount is deposited by the department i.e. Nagar Palika Parishad with the bank and it is for the bank authority to transfer the same in the respective account of the pensioner provided they complete the necessary formalities for the purpose. In the present case it is not known as to for what reason the balance amount due to the petitioner has not been transferred to the petitioner's account. It is not alleged that the full and complete amount has not been deposited with the Bank.

Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 has also filed a supplementary short counter affidavit stating that the bank authorities are not informing the reasons as to why the complete amount has not been transferred to the petitioner's pension account.

Be as it may be, there is no purpose in keeping the petition pending. The factual aspects cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation with regard to the unpaid amount of the post retirement dues to the respondent No.5 within a fortnight from this date. On the submission of such a representation the respondent No.5 shall make an inquiry from the relevant Bank with regard to the amount, which has been transferred to the petitioner's pension account and the reasons why the balance has not yet been transferred. The Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Etawah would cooperate with the respondent No.5 and shall furnish full and complete details in writing within a week from this date of such a request being made by the respondent No.5. The respondent No.5 shall thereupon pass a reasoned and speaking order deciding the representation of the petitioner with regard to the payment of balance amount of arrears of pension admissible to the petitioner. In case it is found that there is any shortage in depositing the dues by the Nagar Palika Parishad, the said shortfall shall be made good within one month of the order. The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent No.5 within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order and the fresh representation by the petitioner.

It is apparent from the record that the petitioner had retired in the year 1995 and the post retirement dues have been deposited by the respondent No.5 in the bank on 8.9.2006.  Therefore, ex facie there is a delay of about ten years in the payment of the post retirement dues to the petitioner. No explanation for such an inordinate delay in depositing or payment of retirement dues has been furnished. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of his post retirement benefits in accordance with the G.O. dated 30th November 1984 which shall also be payable within the aforesaid period of three months.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Dt. 26.3.07

S.S.


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.