CHANDRAKANT GUPTA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

K.M. JOSEPH, C.J

Petitioner approached this Court primarily for payment of post retiral dues i.e. Pension, Gratuity, Amount of Insurance, Provident Fund, Leave

Encashment, and has sought following relief(s):

“Issue a writ, order, rule or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make post retrial dues i.e. Pension, Gratuity, Amount

of Insurance, Provident Fund, Leave encashment, other dues like other arrears with interest and further be pleased to direct the respondents to pay

the monthly pension every month regularly and other dues like arrears of salary, otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.â€​

The petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Local Body in 1981, and became member of the Centralized Service,

while serving in Nagar Palika Parishad, Sitarganj, Udham Singh Nagar (respondent no. 3) and attained his age of superannuation on 31.3.2016.Â

A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2. Paragraph-6 of the counter affidavit inter alia stated as under:

“6. That the payment of post retrial dues of the petitioner have to be made by the Nagar Palika Sitarganj. That by an order dated 04.7.2016 passed

by the Government of Uttarakhand by which taking action on the application made by the petitioner to the Nagar Palika Directorate, Sitarganj for

treating him as a regular employee and releasing his post retiral dues including group insurance, the Government has issued an order no. 1756 dated

16.12.2016 by which a full monthly pension of Rs. 15,930/- has been sanctioned and the entire arrears of full pension amounting to Rs. 2,86,744/- has

been directed to be released in favour of the petitioner and further another order has been issued by letter no. 1754 dated 16.12.2016 by which full

gratuity payment order of Rs. 6,73,743/- of the post retrial benefits have liable to be paid to the petitioner has been passed. That in view of the

aforesaid the present petition is liable to be disposed of.â€​

The petitioner filed rejoinder affidavit. Therein, he states in paragraph-4 as follows:

“4. That in reply to the contents of paragraph no. 6 of the counter affidavit it is submitted here that the petitioner was the member of the

centralized service of the Nagar Palika and the responsibility of payment of pension and other post retrial dues is of the State Govt. nor of the Nagar

Palika, Nagar Palika sent the papers of the petitioner for pension etc. immediately after the retirement of the petitioner but the state Authorities failed

to release the post retrial dues in time and when the petitioner filed the present petition then some of the dues have been released and the insurance

amount has not been paid to the petitioner till date. The petitioner on 16.02.2017 submitted an application to the Director, local bodies stating there in

that the amount of insurance is still not paid and the arrears of time scale which was sanctioned in his favour also not given to the petitioner. The copy

of the application dated 16.02.2017 is being filed herewith as Annexure No. R.A. 1 to this affidavit.â€​

Heard Mr. Dinesh Gahatori, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Prabha Naithani, learned Brief Holder on behalf of the State/respondent

nos. 1 & 2. Though notice seems served upon respondent no. 3 but none appears on its behalf.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is yet to receive amount due by way of leave encashment.Â

In regard to the remaining complaint, we dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the respondent no. 2 (Director, Urban Development, Local

Bodies) to effect payment of remaining sums legally due to the petitioner by way of leave encashment as early as possible within a period of six

weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the judgment before the respondent no. 2.