DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION OFFICER Vs. BABUBHAI RAGHABHAI CHAUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. Mr. Rajesh Mankad, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent No.1.1 and Mr. Manohar D. Rahevar, learned AGP waives service notice of admission on behalf of respondent No.2.

(2.) Present appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, 1865 is directed against the judgment dtd. 20/2/2024 passed by learned Single Judge in captioned writ petition, wherein the learned Single Judge has directed the appellant authorities to pay pension and retiral benefits to the late petitioner (represented through his legal heirs) by considering his qualified service of 22 years i.e. 1977 to 1999 irrespective of the order of compulsory retirement dtd. 21/1/2004. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that the original petitioner, was retired compulsorily vide order dtd. 21/1/2004 by way of punishment. Along with such directions, the learned Single Judge has also directed to pay the interest of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till the petitioner is paid with such benefits.

(3.) Mr. H.S.Munshaw, learned advocate appearing for the appellant - authorities has submitted that the learned Single Judge has ignored in a very vital respect that the late petitioner had obtained the certificate from the Medical Board on 16/10/2007, after he was compulsorily retired vide order dtd. 21/1/2004. He has submitted that in fact, the original petitioner (deceased) used to remain absent from his services and hence, the appellant - authorities were constrained to issue notice to him, however, he did not respond to the same. Learned advocate, Mr. Munshaw has submitted that after the appellant - authorities considered his continuous absence from the post, they were constrained to pass the impugned order of compulsory retirement. Mr.Munshaw, learned advocate for the appellant - authorities has further submitted that the original petitioner (deceased) did not produce any certificate from Medical Board though he was requested to do so and after the order of compulsory retirement was passed, he appeared before the Medical Board on 16/10/2007 and obtained the certificate, in which it is certified that the original petitioner (deceased) is not fit for the post of teacher. Learned advocate has further submitted that the original petitioner (deceased) assailed the order of compulsory retirement which was passed in the year 2004 by filing the captioned writ petition, after a period of 07 years in 2011 and hence, the learned Single Judge has erred in quashing and setting aside the order of compulsory retirement and directing the appellant - authorities to grant the retiral benefits that too with interest. Thus, it is urged that the present appeal may be allowed by setting aside the impugned order of the learned Single Judge.