Santosh Kumar vs Managing Director, Himachal Road Transport, Shimla

Ranjan Sharma, J

Notice. Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Vashishat, learned counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition, is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the order(s) intended to be passed herein.

The petitioner, having retired from the post of Divisional Manager on 28.02.2023 from Himachal Road Transport Corporation, has filed the instant writ petition, with the following prayer:-

“i). That respondent may kindly be directed to pay the DCRG Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lac) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum on the pending dues under law till the actual payment of the aforesaid amount.

ii). That the respondent may further directed to pay the interest @ 9% on the leave encashment and also to pay the interest on delayed period more than nine months same was withheld by the respondent corporation.

iii). That the directions may kindly be issued to the respondent to give arrears of revised pay scale from 01.01.2016 and produce the entire record pertaining to the case for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.”

Case of the petitioner is that consequent upon the issuance of the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules dated 03.01.2022, revising the pay scales to State Government Employees w.e.f. 01.01.2016 and the Office Memorandum dated 25.02.2022 giving the revised pension, revised gratuity, revised leave encashment and revised commuted pension for State Government Employees, who retired/died on or after 01.01.2016, the Respondent-Corporation issued its own Office Memorandum on 01.08.2022 giving the revised pay scales and revised retiral benefits to the employees of the Corporation w.e.f. 01.01.2016. In this background, the petitioner is claiming benefits of (i) the arrears of revised pay w.e.f. 01.01.2016 till the date of superannuation; and (ii) the revised retiral benefits i.e. Revised Pension, Revised Gratuity, Revised Leave Encashment and Revised Commuted Pension along interest thereon.

Learned counsel further submits that firstly, respondents have not released the arrears of pay for the period w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 28.02.2023 as yet; secondly, the respondents have neither released the Revised Benefits i.e. Revised Leave Encashment, Revised Commuted Pension, Revised Gratuity under the C.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1972; nor the arrears of Revised Pension for the period w.e.f. 01.03.2023 to the petitioner till day.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance, on the judgment passed by this Court, in CWP No.5651 of 2023, tilted as Dr. Sunil Kumar Chandel and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 26.09.2023, CWP No.7895 of 2023, titled as Krishan Lal & others Versus State of H.P. & others, decided on 18.10.2023. He also placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7359 of 2021, titled as Amita Gupta Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 01.12.2022, granting the revised leave encashment on the basis of revised pay. He further submits that the judgment in case of Amita Gupta (supra) stands implemented and in CWP No.2108 of 2023 titled as Bhagat Ram Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, decided on 31.05.2023, whereby this Court has mandated the respondents therein to release the arrears of pay as well as revised retiral benefits along with arrears with interest @ 6% per annum from the due date till its realization.

On the other hand, Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Vashishat, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents submits that the judgment in case of Bhagat Ram (supra) has not attained finality, as the HRTC-Respondent therein has filed a Review Petition, which is pending listing/hearing.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied, in case, this Court permits him to make a representation for claiming above benefits. The prayer being innocuous, is not opposed and needs to be granted.

Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, and as per the request so made, this Court permits the petitioner to make fresh representation to Respondent-Managing Director, Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Shimla, giving all details material-particulars, within two weeks from today; with further directions to aforesaid respondent to consider/examine the claim(s) of the petitioner the light of existing norms/rules and Law and also to keep in view the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Bhagat Ram and Amita Gupta (supra); and then to pass the appropriate orders, within six weeks thereafter.

Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted to the merits of the matter and all questions of facts and law are left open.

In the aforesaid terms, the instant writ petition as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.