Smt. Samuda Bibi vs Har Bhajan Singh and Another

Devendra Pratap Singh, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The husband of the applicant was appointed as a Resident Medical Officer in Unani Medical College, Allahabad on 1.9.1957. He continuously worked as Resident Medical Officer for about 24 hours and 10 months till July, 1982 when the said College was provincialized and the State Government took over control of the College under U.P. Indian Medical Institutions (Acquisition and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1982. Subsequently, he retired on 30.6.1993 while working as Resident Medical Officer at Allahabad. As his retiral benefits were not being paid, he preferred writ petition No. 346 of 1996 and despite several opportunities being granted to the opposite parties, no counter affidavit was filed, a Division Bench Court vide its order and judgment dated 10.4.1996 imposed Rs. 5,000/- as cost and further directed that his entire retiral benefits including pension and gratuity be released within a period of two months along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date it became due till the date of payment. The said order was not complied forcing him to prefer Contempt Petition No. 172 of 1997. During the pendency of the said contempt application certain amounts were paid but pension was refused ignoring his services rendered prior to take over by the State Government and accordingly, they passed an order dated 25.10.2004. The said contempt petition was finally disposed off by the following relevant part of the order:

Learned Counsel for the applicant has rightly contended that the State has erroneously considered his regularization under the 1979 Rules as amended in 2001 though his case ought to have been considered in view of U.P. Indian Medical Institution (Acquisition & Misc. Provisions) Act, 1982 by which the applicant was absorbed in the State service on the same terms and conditions under which he was working. However, in contempt jurisdiction, this Court cannot adjudicate upon this right of the applicant and in case he is aggrieved, he can approach the appropriate forum.

In my opinion, the judgment and order of the writ court has been substantially complied with. Notices are discharged. Contempt Petition is rejected. Consigned to records.

As Dr. Usmani expired, his wife preferred Writ Petition No. 50978 of 2004 against the aforesaid stand of the State and another Division Bench of this Court through a reasoned judgment allowed the claim of the applicant holding that the period prior to take over should be taken into consideration for the purposes of pension and thereafter family pension and passed the following operative order allowing the writ petition on 27.10.2006:

For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. We, however, direct that the respondents shall calculate the pension as per rules payable to late Dr. Hamdam Usmani and pay arrears thereof till the date of his death i.e. 30.7.2004 and thereafter pay family pension to the petitioner at the prescribed rates in accordance with the rules. Arrears shall be paid within a maximum period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order and produced before the respondents alongwith arrears of pension which became payable to Dr. Hamdam Usmani in his life time. The petitioner shall be paid family pension regularly thereafter in accordance with law. The petitioner will also be paid interest @ 7.5.% per annum on the arrears of pension and that of family pension within the same period. Costs easy.

Against the aforesaid judgment a SLP No. 3779 of 2007 was preferred before the Apex Court which was also dismissed vide order dated 27.4.2004 but yet the judgment was not complied forcing the applicant to prefer Contempt Petition No. 1210 of 2007 and believing upon the compliance affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite parties the proceedings were dropped on 4.12.2007. However, admittedly, the services rendered between 1.9.1957 to 1.7.1982 were not considered for the purposes of pension and the applicant approached the Government which passed an order on 17.6.2008 that in compliance with the writ judgment dated 27.10.2006 the period between 1.9.1957 to 1.7.1982 has to be taken into consideration for the purposes of pension. Yet there was no full compliance forcing the applicant to prefer the present Contempt Petition.

Upon issuance of notice, affidavits have been exchanged between the parties but despite directions of this Court the calculation by which the amount has been quantified was not brought on record and the applicant has given the detailed calculation to show that she is entitled to about rupees ten lacs more. The State was also granted time to challenge the said averment but to no avail.

Whoever is working as Principal Secretary, Medical Education, Govt. of U.P. and as Director Ayurvedic and Unani Services are directed to comply with the judgment dated 27.10.2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 50978 of 2004 in its entirety in letter and spirit and also file an affidavit giving the detailed calculation as to how the amount has been quantified and both will be present on the next date.

Let a copy of this order be given to Shri K.R. Singh, learned Standing counsel within 48 hours.