HASMUKHRAI R BHADIYADRA Vs. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Ms. S.N. Pahwa for the petitioner; Mr. K.H. Baxi, learned advocate for respondents no.1-2 and Ms. Shraddha Trivedi, learned AGP for respondent No.3.

(2.) In this petition, rule was issued by this Court on 14.2.1994 and it was made returnable in the month of July, 1994. Pursuant to the order dated 10.1.1994, an amount of Rs.30,357.00 being the amount of commuted pension has been deposited in this Court by the first respondent. Considering that fact, while issuing rule in this matter on 14.2.1994, this Court has also directed the registry of this Court to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs.30,357.00 by way of fixed deposit for a period of two years in a nationalized bank. The amount was directed to be deposited within a fortnight from 14.2.1994.

(3.) Brief facts of the present petition are to the effect that the petitioner was appointed as Jr. Clerk in Taluka Panchayat, Botad on 10.3.1961; on 30.9.1990, the petitioner was retired on superannuation from the post of Jr. Clerk; by order dated 13.11.1990, provisional pension and gratuity was sanctioned from 1.10.1990 to 1.10.1991; thereafter, again, by order dated 18.1.1992, provisional pension was sanctioned upto 39.9.1992 wherein it has clearly been provided that the provisional pension is sanctioned upto 30.9.1992 or upto the date on which the final pension is sanctioned, whichever is earlier. According to the petitioner, in the said order, it has been mentioned that because of some administrative reasons, the final pension has not been decided. According to the petitioner, no departmental inquiry has been initiated or pending against the petitioner. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though various oral and written representations for sanctioning his final pension were made, same were not considered by the respondents. That on 18.9.1991, the petitioner made representation to the District Development Officer and the Taluka Development Officer and the Account Officer of Bhavnagar but the petitioner has not received any reply so far and, therefore,the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition claiming pensionary benefits from the respondents with interest. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 have filed affidavit in reply on 10th April, 1992 and 20th January, 1994. The petitioner has filed rejoinder on 14th December, 1993.