Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, having retired from the service of the respondent University on 31.07.2013, had his terminal benefits settled in course of time. However, in the light of the pay revisions of 1986 and 1996, the petitioner claims arrears thereof, which are to be paid along with his pensionary benefits. Complaining of non-payment of those arrears, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
WPC 30544/14 2
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner waited more than five years to have the arrears of pay paid, but all his efforts proved futile. The learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that though the respondent University has every intention to pay the arrears, given its precarious financial position, it could not honour its statutory commitment. He has further undertaken that the respondent University will pay the arrears within six months.
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University that the pay revision arrears will be paid within six months, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent University to pay the arrears as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv