HARENDAR SINGH BISHT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are the three Writ Petitions, which engages consideration of the common question of facts and law, apart from the fact, that the claim raised, therein, by the petitioners since is payability to them, by way of the retiral benefits which stood admitted by respondent vide their sanction by the respondents, the controversy and their claim becomes easier to be considered by this Court.

(2.) The petitioners have contended that they would be entitled to receive the retiral benefits which would payable to them towards various retiral benefits head as detailed in Paragraph No. 8, of the writ petitions respectively. They have filed a Writ Petitions praying for the said amount as detailed in the respective relief clause, may be disbursed, and further that the issue stands covered by the judgment which has already been rendered by this Court in a Writ Petition being WPSS No. 74 of 2019, "Rajendra Prasad Thapliyal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another", which was in turn based upon the earlier judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, as rendered in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 494 of 2015, "Lalita Prasad Tewari Vs. Uttarakhand Payjal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman Nigam", as decided on 30/11/2015 which would be admittedly applicable in the instant writ petitions. The only distinctions in these three Writ Petitions are as under:-

(3.) In WPSS No. 14 of 2022, "Harendar Singh Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others", the petitioner who was working with the respondents as a Tax Collector, had attained the age of superannuation and retired from the services of the respondents on 31/5/2021, and has filed the writ petition, claiming for the remittance of the gratuity, and the statutory interest payable on it, arrears of the ACP, and the arrears of the 7th Pay Commission, as well as the bonus, as detailed in paragraph No. 8, of the writ petition, which is extracted hereunder:-