DEEPAK JOSHI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defect, as pointed out by the Registry is ignored. The petitioner after completing his 35 years of service has attained the age of superannuation on 30/6/2018 and he retired as Senior Administrative Officer from the respondent's department.

(2.) The respondent's department had already sanctioned the pension of the petitioner and other retiral dues which is payable to him by an order dtd. 30/8/2018. When despite of representation being submitted by the petitioner, the same was not complied with, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition praying for the reliefs as detailed in para 6 of the writ petition which is quoted hereunder 1 Leave encashment of 300 days Rs.6,27,020.00 (sanctioned vide order dtd. 30/8/2018 but not paid) 2 Gratuity (calculated and Rs.10,34,583.00 sanctioned to pay vide order dtd. 30/8/2018 but not paid) Total Rs.16,61,603.00

(3.) The parity has been claimed by the petitioner from the judgements referred herein below, and the case of the petitioner is that the amount as mentioned in the representation of the petitioner stood sanctioned, are the facts which are not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. Even this Court is of the view that the undisputed amount of sanctioned retiral dues ought not to have been curtailed to be paid to a retired employee, as it acts as a source of survival of the retired employee and his family too who after retirement becomes dependent on the pension and retiral dues to meet their daily requirements. It is not a bounty but rather a right of the retired employee to be paid with its' retiral dues payable and entitled to be received by him under law.