High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Sri Shiv Pujan Upadhyaya v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 10164 of 2006  RD-AH 617 (10 January 2007)
Court No. 38
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 10164 of 2006
Sri Shiv Pujan Upadhyaya
State of U.P and others
Petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to consider the pensionary benefit of the petitioner regarding the absent period of service.
Brief facts giving rise to instant writ petition is that petitioner has been performing and discharging duties with effect from 26.03.1968 Petitioner was absented from duty with effect from 01.03.1982 to 21.12.1995. Petitioner has approached U.P. Public Service Tribunal wherein on 14.09.1995 order has been passed by U.P. Public Service Tribunal directing in respect of period of absent and arrears of salary, order shall be passed after making regular departmental inquiry. Thereafter regular departmental inquiry was undertaken and on 06.06.1997 decision was taken to the effect that for the period when petitioner has been absented no salary shall be made admissible but on humanitarian consideration the aforesaid period when petitioner was absented, said period shall be clubbed in service for computing for the purposes of pensonary benefit. Petitioner thereafter stood superannuated on 31.08.2001. Thereafter petitioner has requested for pensonary benefit but as no action was taken petitioner preferred Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 74010 of 2005 before this Court and this Court asked the authority concerned to consider the claim of the petitioner. Thereafter claim of the petitioner has been considered. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.
Counter affidavit has been filed and to the said counter affidavit rejoinder affidavit has been filed.
After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged present writ petition has been taken up with the consent of the parties for final hearing and disposal.
Sri Keshav Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner contended with vehemence that pension in question has not been properly computed and period when petitioner was absent same has been ignored as such view taken is incorrect view and as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.
Sri J.K. Tiwari, Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that rightful decision has been taken and as such no interference is warranted.
After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging is to the effect that petitioner absented himself from 01.03.1982 to 21.12.1995. Disciplinary proceedings have been undertaken against the petitioner and in the said proceedings as directed by U.P. Public Service Tribunal final decision has been taken to the effect that the period for which petitioner has not worked no salary is to be ensured to him but on humanitarian consideration the aforesaid period for which petitioner has absented himself same shall be computed for the purposes of computing pension. Alongwith the counter affidavit details of calculation have been provided for and therein entire period of service which has been computed on which pension has been calculated is 33 years four months and 28 days. Each and every detail qua fixation of pension has been mentioned in the communication dated 24.06.2005 as such there is no infirmity in the same.
Consequently no interference is required, as such writ petition is dismissed.
10th January, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.