1.Learned Advocate for the respondent- University Mr. Thacker states that, respondent No.4, who was original applicant before the Tribunal, is not getting any pension today, even for the lower post, from where she has retired. According to Mr. Thacker, the pension case could not be Page 1 of 5 HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Thu Aug 25 03:05:14 IST 2016 C/SCA/2552/1999 ORDER prepared, since the pay verification unit of Local Fund Office raised certain objections vide communication dated 23rd February, 2012. On reading the said letter dated 23rd February, 2012, it transpires that the objection raised by the Local Fund, Rajkot on 23rd February, 2012, was pursuant to the pay verification case sent by the Saurashtra University on 6th February,2012. From the said letter, it further transpires that the said pay verification is for revision of pay of 1998 (effective from 1.1.1996), which was sent to Local Fund in February, 2012. Respondent- Saurashtra University may file affidavit giving details as to when the cases of other employees (teaching and non teaching), were sent to Local Fund, Rajkot, for such pay verification. Be it noted that after pay revision effective from 1.1.1996, next revision also came into force w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Therefore, the respondent-
correspondence with Local Fund in that regard also. On the face of the above two informations, the delay if any, that University may find in sending the pay fixation case of respondent No.4 to Local Fund, Rajkot may also be explained.
2.Mr. Thacker further states that on the suggestion of Local Fund, Rajkot papers for provisional pension were sent to the office of Commissioner, Higher Education, on 13th June, 2012. There is nothing on record as to what has happened to the said proposal of provisional pension, which is claimed to have been forwarded to the office of Commissioner of Higher Education, Government of Gujarat.
3.Mr. Thacker further states that after the proposal for provisional pension was forwarded to the Commissioner, Higher Education, no further action is taken with regard to preparation of regular pension case of respondent No.4. According to him, it is Page 3 of 5 HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Thu Aug 25 03:05:14 IST 2016 C/SCA/2552/1999 ORDER pending, since as per understanding given by the Local Fund Office of Rajkot, until the present petition is decided, final pension case can not be prepared and only provisional pension can be paid.
4.The Respondent No:4 has retired on attaining the age of superannuation in June, 2012 after serving for 27 years. The main controversy is as to whether the promotion denied to her was justified or not. At this stage the situation is that the respondent No.4 does not get any pension, even for the cadre from which she has actually retired and where she would be even after loosing in this petition. It is further noted that it is not being paid under the guise of pendency of petition.
5.It is reported that Local Fund, Rajkot, functions under the Administrative Control of Finance Department, Government of Gujarat and for respondent- University, office of the Commissioner Higher Education, would have Page 4 of 5 HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Thu Aug 25 03:05:14 IST 2016 C/SCA/2552/1999 ORDER Administrative Control for such matters. The responsible officer from both these departments, not below the rank of Deputy Secretary, who can reconcile and resolve this issue, may be required to be directed to remain present before this Court on 27.12.2012. On that day the Registrar of Saurashtra University may also be required to remain present before this Court. However, appropriate orders giving such direction may be passed on 24th December, 2012.
6.At the request of Mr. Soni, learned A.G.P., list the matter on 24th December, 2012 to take appropriate step.
(PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) salim/25 Page 5 of 5 HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Thu Aug 25 03:05:14 IST 2016