S.S.DUBEY Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by means of this writ petition seeks the relief of payment of both the service gratuity and the retirement gratuity as provided in Rules 49 and 50 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Petitioner claims that both the amounts in terms of Rules 49 and 50 are payable (and not only one of the amounts of retirement gratuity) in spite of the fact that petitioner is getting pension for his earlier services rendered in the military/Army prior to his being employed by the respondent no.3/Army Public School. Rules 49 and 50 of the CCS Pension Rules are therefore required to be interpreted, and the same read as under:-

(2.) For the purpose of entitlement to both the service gratuity and the retirement gratuity, reliance is placed upon the order of the Director of Education dated 30.4.2004 and the same reads as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_3365_ILRDLH23_2013_4.html</FRM>

(3.) Since the language of the order of the Director of Education dated 30.4.2004 seems to suggest that service gratuity and retirement gratuity were both payable simultaneously in spite of petitioner receiving pension for his Army services by an order dated 24.1.2013, the Director of Education was asked to file its affidavit with regard to Rules 49 and 50 as also its order dated 30.4.2004. Two affidavits dated 19.2.2013 and 2.5.2013 have been filed however I find that the same really are not in compliance of the orders of this Court and this Court is left with the impression that matters have been for some reason left vague.