SMT. TARA BALGOPAL Vs. RAJDHANI COLLEGE & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was an employee of the respondent no. 1 -college. Through this writ petition petitioner claims monetary emoluments under various heads from the respondent no. 1. The heads under which claims are made are arrears towards higher grade pay, leave encashment allowance, amount due on account of wrongful deductions made from the salary, LTC and so on. I may note that effectively, petitioner is seeking a money decree from the respondent no. 1 under different heads. Although, ordinarily suits should be filed for such claims, however, considering that it is an old matter and there are really no vexed questions of facts, therefore, I am proceeding to dispose of this writ petition on merits. The first claim of the petitioner is that on being appointed to the respondent no. 1 -college as on 16.7.1965, petitioner's salary should have been fixed instead of Rs. 400, at the figure of Rs. 440/ - w.e.f. 1.2.1966. etitioner claims an amount of Rs. 3,41,135.41.

(2.) A reference to the writ petition shows that no calculations whatsoever are given, and there are no pleadings before this Court as to how this figure of Rs. 3,41,135.41 is arrived at. Detailed calculations on this aspect were necessary because it is not disputed that petitioner was entitled to Rs. 440/ - per month w.e.f. 1.2.1966, however, the respondent no. 1 states that whatever amount was due to the petitioner stands paid. Therefore, in the absence of any calculations money decree of such a huge amount cannot be fastened upon the respondent no. 1. This claim is therefore rejected.

(3.) IT may be noted that petitioner was re -employed by the respondent no. 1 in accordance with the extant rules, and for the period of re -employment a total of 58 days leave encashment was due to the petitioner, and for which days also the petitioner has been made the necessary payment. This claim of the petitioner is also therefore rejected.