AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 393 wordsHarish Kumar, J
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has prayed to this Court for the following reliefs:
“(i) Payment of Rs. 28,908/- towards 50% merger of Dearness Relief in Pension for the period 01.01.2005 to 31.03.2007 payable to Late Prof. Rajendra Prasad Sharma, the father of petitioner.
(ii) Difference of balance amount of arrears of revision of 20% enhanced additional pension admissible on attaining 80 years of age w.e.f. 02.06.2016 payable to Late Prof. Rajendra Prasad Sharma as per Resolution No.-593 dated 06.03.2019 of the Finance Department, Government of Bihar while revising the pension w.e.f. 01.01.2016 for University employees for the period 02.06.2016 to 11.10.2018.
(iii) Medical allowance on pension @Rs.1000/- instead of Rs.200/- for the period 20.10.2017 to 11.10.2018 payable to Prof. Rajendra Prasad Sharma.
(iv) Family pension @43,260/- instead of Rs.14,220/-for the period 12.10.2018 to 31.03.2019 payable to petitioner.
(v) Medical Allowance on Family Pension@Rs. 1000/-instead of Rs. 200/- for the period 12.10.2018 to 31.03.2019 payable to petitioner.
(vi) Penal/Statutory interest on delayed payment of Family pension including arrears amounting to Rs. 27,02,449/- to the petitioner for the period 12.10.2018 to 28.02.2023 which was actually paid vide letter dated 27.02.2023 despite order of the Hon'ble Court to pay the same within a month vide order dated 24.09.2020 in CWJC no. 5689 of 2019.
(vii) For any other relief/reliefs to which he may be found entitled in the facts of the present case.”
After some argument, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that for ventilating the grievance as raised hereinabove, the petitioner has filed a detailed representation, copy of which is placed on record as Annexures-P/12 and P/13; however, till date the same has not been brought to its logical conclusion and, thus, the petitioner has not been extended the benefits.
Learned Advocates for the respondents are present.
Considering the limited grievance of the petitioner, the present writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 4 to consider the claim of the petitioner as raised in Anneuxre P/12 to the writ petition, preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
Suffice it to observe, in case the claim of the petitioner finds favour, consequential monetary benefits shall be accorded to her within the stipulated period.
The writ petition stands disposed off.