Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9112 of 2018 Petitioner :- Dhanushadhari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manu Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Manu Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no.3 & 4.
In view of the nature of the order sought to be passed, it is not necessary to issue any notice to the respondent no.5.
Learned counsel for the parties are ad- idem that the primary issues raised herein stands covered in light of the judgment of this Court rendered in Sri Krishna Prasad Yadv and others vs. State of U.P. and others passed in Writ petition No.28679 of 2009 decided on 29.01.2015. While disposing of the aforementioned writ petition, this Court held as under:
"The category of Institutions referred in Rule 3 clearly include Primary Sections. It is the undisputed position that the Institutions in which the petitioners were serving had Primary Sections and even though run by Private Management were recognized for the purposes of payment of grant-in-aid. These Rules did not prescribe a cut off date for the purposes of a person becoming eligible for grant of pension thereunder. In fact, Rule 4(b) clearly throws light on this aspect of the matter when it grants an option to existing members in permanent service to opt and elect to be governed by these Rules. The Rules themselves came into effect from 1.10.1964 and would, therefore, be applicable to all thereof. Insofar as the aspect of deposit of management contribution as envisaged under the said Rule is concerned, this Court had already struck down the cut of date of 31st March, 2002 as prescribed by the Government Order dated 26.07.2001 in Smt. Shanti Solanki Vs. State of U.P. and Others passed in W.P. No. 75746 of 2006 and the said decision has been consistently followed in various other cases decided by this Court including W.P. No. 17033 of 2012, Lal Chand Singh Vs. State of U.P. And Others. About the payment of pension being governed solely by the provisions of the Rules 1964, this Court is of the opinion that its applicability could not have been eclipsed or in any manner straddled over by the Government Order dated 20th January, 2004. This Court is in agreement with the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge in Mangali Prasad (supra) on the issue that merely because there was delay in issuing appropriate clarifications with regard to the applicability of the Rules to Primary Sections, the same could not have denuded the petitioners of their right to claim pension under the Rules 1964. It is further relevant to note here that the Primary Section was an integral part of the Institution and the teachers attached thereto could not have been discriminated for the purposes of payment of pension merely because they came on to grant-in-aid list w.e.f. 1.10.1989. In the opinion of the Court, there is no provision under the Rules 1964 which curtails the computation of length of qualifying service to the time when the Primary Sections became or came under the grant-in-aid list.
Accordingly and in view of the above, this writ petition is allowed and it is accordingly held that the petitioners shall be entitled to pension under the provisions of the Rules 1964. The management contribution required to be deposited may be so made within a period of two months and thereafter the respondents shall proceed to compute the pension of the petitioners taking into account the total length of qualifying service rendered by them and in light of the observations made hereinabove. The pension so computed and becoming liable to be paid to the petitioners from their respective dates of superannuation will be paid within a period of two months from the date of deposit of management contribution and the arrears shall carry interest of 12 per cent per annum."
Accordingly, the petitioners have undertaken to deposit the management contribution with the respondents for considering their claim for grant of pension. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, it is directed that in case the petitioner deposits the management contribution within a period of two months from today, the respondents shall proceed to compute the pension payable to them.
Subject to the completion of all formalities and verification of relevant records, the exercise of computation be completed by the respondents expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months thereafter.
With the above observations/direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 A. Pandey