ADMINISTRATOR Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS both these appeals under clause 15 of the Letters Patent arise out of the common judgment dated 30.8.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.9238 of 1994, the same are decided and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the original petitioner joined the service of Bagasara Municipality on 18.2.1978 as Administrative Officer cum Secretary. He was then appointed as Chief Officer on 14.6.1990. He was appointed in the grade of Rs.2000 -35000. On reaching the age of superannuation, the petitioner was retired from service by order dated 30.3.1993 with effect from 30.6.1993. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.1 appellant passed Resolution No.45 on 1.7.1993 for giving pensionary benefits such as pension, gratuity etc. to the petitioner and then passed order dated 13.10.1993 sanctioning the pension to the petitioner at Rs.505/ - per month with gratuity and commuted pension of Rs.16,800/ - and Rs.21,732/ - respectively as per the Pension and Gratuity Rules framed by the respondent No.2 herein - Director of Municipalities. However, by order dated 31.12.1993, the respondent No.1 appellant herein decided not to release pensionary benefits till final order in Criminal Case No.278 of 1992 against the petitioner was passed. The petitioner was then acquitted in the said criminal case by order dated 22.3.1994. However, the petitioner was still not given benefit of pension, gratuity etc. in spite of the representations made by him. The petitioner, thus, filed the petition initially for seeking direction for release of his retiral dues with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 1.7.1993. It is noticed from the papers available with us that since the petitioner died pending the petition, his heirs have been brought on record. The petition was then amended, whereby the petitioners prayed to fix pension at the rate of Rs.2025/ - per month with effect from 1.7.1993 with consequential increase / benefits as per the Pension Rules with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The petitioner also prayed to quash and set aside the action of the respondents appellants herein in recovering Rs.80,818.78 ps. from the pension of the petitioner.

(3.) WE have heard learned advocates for the parties.