Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8660 of 2021 Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashank Shekhar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Mohd. Naushad Sidddiqui, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners alleging that the retiral dues have not been paid to the petitioners despite the petitioners superannuated on 31st July, 2020 (in respect of petitioner no. 1) and 30th June, 2019 (in respect of petitioner no. 2). The petitioners claim that they were also issued a 'no dues certificate' and were thus entitled to payment of pension.
3. This Court had called for instructions from the Standing Counsel on the last date. The Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions, argues that the payment has not been done on account of objection that challenging the regularization of the petitioners, some writ petition has been filed. In the light of the said, the following order was passed by this Court on 13.9.2021:-
"Pursuant to the earlier order passed, learned Standing Counsel had obtained instructions. From those instructions it is submitted that the retiral benefits of the petitioners have not been released on account of the pendency of a writ petition in this Court. Upon being queried further, it was stated that the aforesaid writ petition has been preferred by certain other Collection Amins questioning the order of regularization passed in favour of the petitioners. Prima facie that cannot constitute a valid ground for denial of retiral benefits.
In view of the aforesaid, an interim mandamus is hereby issued calling upon the respondent nos. 2 to 5 to produce before this Court all sums which according to them are admittedly due and payable to the petitioners under the head of retiral benefits or show cause on or before the next date fixed.
Include in the additional cause list of 29 September 2021."
4. Today, when the matter is taken up, apparently the said order dated 13.9.2021 has not been complied with.
5. The Standing Counsel argues that the instructions states that on account of a challenge to the regularization of the petitioner, retiral dues have not been paid.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that on the basis of similar ground taken by the State Government, this Court had allowed Writ-A No. 13400 of 2019 (Shivraj and another Vs. State of U.P. and others), decided on 30.9.2019, rejecting the ground of non-payment of retiral dues on account of pendency of the writ petition challenging the regularization of the petitioners therein. The relevant observations made by this Court are quoted hereinbelow:-
"From the facts that have been brought on record, it is apparent that petitioners were regularized in the year 2003 and such regularization subsists even as on date. Petitioners have completed their tenure and have superannuated. Merely because a writ petition is filed against the regularization order would not be a ground to deny release of retiral benefits, clearly when no order etc. has been passed against them. Action of the respondents in withholding petitioners' retiral benefit, therefore, cannot be approved of.
Writ petition, consequently, succeeds and is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to ensure release of all retiral benefits to the petitioners, within a period of four months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order, failing which the petitioners would also be entitled to interest at the rate of 8% per annum. It would be open for the respondents to recover the amount of interest from the salary of person, who is found responsible for not releasing the retiral benefits in terms of this order."
7. In view of the fact that this Court has already repelled the stand taken by the State for not paying the retiral dues as unfair and arbitrary, the writ petition is allowed with directions to the respondents to pay the retiral dues to the petitioner preferably, within a period of three months alongwith interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of retirement of the petitioner till actual payment.
8. The petitioner stands disposed off in terms of the said order.
9. Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 29.9.2021 S. Rahman