Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Chhuna v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 8397 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6633 (30 November 2005)


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).


Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari , J.

       Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

       The petitioner was working as a Beldar (Class IV employee) in Nagar Nigam, Kanpur Nagar. He had been retired from service on 31.8.2004. He alleges to have not been paid his retiral benefits. Even the pension has not been paid to him regularly. He has moved several representations in this regard, but all of them fell on the deaf ears of the respondents, hence this writ petition.

      In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the financial position of the Nagar Nigam, Kanpur Nagar is very critical due to which payment of retiral dues including pension of the retired employees could not be made. It has further been stated that the payments are being made according to availability of fund without any discrimination according to seniority of retirement.

       Admittedly the payment is due. The U.P. Palika (Centralized Service) Rules, 1968 govern the services of the petitioner. According to the U.P. Palika (Centralized Service) Rules, 1968 all legal formalities for payment of retiral dues are to be completed before retirement of the employees. There is no question of making payment according to any seniority list prepared by the Nagar Nigam. An employee has a constitutional right to live with dignity enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. The employees of Nagar Nigam have not been paid retiral dues for the last 10 to 12 years. Such seniority list is only a sham to cover the misdeed of non-payment of dues to the retired employees.

       The controversy of the instant writ petition is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in Civil Misc. Writ No. 21297 of 2004 (Rasheed Ali Vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 20.9.2005.

       In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

       In view of the ratio laid down in Rasheed Ali''s case (supra) this writ petition        is allowed with the direction that the respondents 2 and 3 will ensure regular payment of pension to the petitioner along with other post-retiral dues with compound interest at the rate of 10% per annum within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and shall further make payment of his pension month to month as and when it falls due. In case of default the recovery shall be made from the erring officers as arrears of land revenue within one month thereafter and shall be paid to the petitioner forthwith within a week of its recovery. Cost is assessed at Rs. 5000/- on respondent nos. 2 and 3 to be paid to the petitioner within a month for not taking action for payment of pension and other post-retiral dues within time in accordance with the G.O. dated 13.12.77 and in making the poor employee run from pillar to post for the pensionary benefits and other post-retiral benefits without any just cause.

Dated: 30.11.2005



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


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 |

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