Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. P. DEVI versus STATE OF U.P. & OHTERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. P. Devi v. State Of U.P. & Ohters - WRIT - A No. 39982 of 1993 [2004] RD-AH 70 (10 February 2004)

 

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.23

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.39982 of 1993

Smt. Prema Devi (Radha Charan Lal, since dead) Vs. State of

U.P. and another

***

Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

This writ petition was filed in the year 1993 claiming relief for grant of Pension and Gratuity to the petitioner and for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to add the services rendered by the petitioner as Cooperative Supervisor, Grade III thereby reckoning ten years of employment for the purpose of grant of pension as a benefit after superannuation. The petitioner Radha Charan Lal died on 7.2.1999 and in his place the name of Smt. Prema Devi his widow was substituted.

The petitioner has submitted as under:-

1) That the respondents have not calculated the aforesaid period i.e. from 16.5.1952 to 2.1.1979 on the ground that the period of service had been under the Co-operative Union and not in Government service.

2) That since petitioner's husband had expired on 7.2.1999 without getting any pension consequently the petitioner is also not getting any family pension.

The counsel for the petitioner has relied on number of decisions of this court, granting pensionary benefits to number of co-operative supervisor after retirement reckoning the service of period as co-operative supervisor for the purpose of calculating qualifying service.  Mainly, in writ petition no. 26318 of 1994, Smt. Ramvati Pathak Vs. State of U.P. and others, decided on 19.12.1997; in Writ Petition no. 16408 of 1993 Nawab Singh Chauhan Vs. State of U.P. and others decided on 13.1.1998 and in Writ Petition no. 314 of 1982 Ram Pyare Singh Vs. State of U.P., decided 26.11.1987. Copies of the said judgments are annexed as Annexures-1, 2 and 3 to the written submissions.

 In the said cases the facts are identical to the present writ petition.  This court while relying upon the various other judgments on the same footing of similarly situated co-operative supervisor, directed the respondents to calculate the pensionary benefits after reckoning the period of services performed as co-operative supervisor with the direction to modify the pensionary benefits accordingly.  In the said judgments the Government Order dated 26.3.1993 has been referred to whereby the services of number of supervisors on the post of co-operative supervisors were calculated for pensionary benefits.  In one of the matter the State Government vide its Government Order dated 7.1.1984 directed the Managing Director of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation to calculate the services of its employees rendered by them for the purpose of calculating qualifying service.  Copy of the G.O. dated 7.11.1984 is filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition.  

Time was granted to the standing counsel to file counter affidavit, but in spite of that no counter affidavit has been filed on the record, though on 27.8.1999, when the case was taken up the standing counsel made a statement that a counter affidavit had been filed on 16.10.1997. The registry was directed to search out the counter affidavit and place it on record. A copy of the same was also served on the counsel for the petitioner in the Court on the same day by the then standing counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioner was granted one months' time to file a rejoinder affidavit. The petitioner filed rejoinder affidavit, which is on record. The registry vide its report dated 8.5.2000 disclosed that from the perusal of the progress register, no counter affidavit appears to have been filed at all in this case. The case was passed-over on subsequent dates on the request of the counsels. In the mean while the petitioner died and a substitution application was filed, which was allowed.

Learned standing counsel has placed un-sworn copy of the counter affidavit disclosing therein the date of affirmation as 13.10.1997. Since there is no counter affidavit on record and no reliance can be placed on the un-sworn and unsigned copy of the counter affidavit dated 13th October 1997. Taking note of the Judgments cited by the counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition Nos. 314 of 1982, 16408 of 1993 and 26318 of 1994, which squarely covers up the case of the petitioner. This Court has no other option but to direct the respondents to comply with the directions dated 2.11.1993 passed by this Court directing the respondents to fix petitioner's pension and other retiral benefits giving the benefit of the period of service rendered by the petitioner as Cooperative Supervisor and officiating Assistant Development Officer/Cooperative Inspector Grade-II, within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is submitted by the petitioner.

The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay pension, gratuity and other post retrial benefits to the petitioner from the date it was payable to late Radha Charan Lal, husband of substituted petitioner Smt. Prema Devi, who retired from the post of Assistant Development Officer Co-operative on 31.10.1984, calculating the same by taking into consideration the entire length of service rendered by the petitioner as a co-operative supervisor, Grade 3. The necessary order for modification of pensionary and other consequential benefits, if any, shall also be passed by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

February 10, 2004

Hasnain


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.