NALINI K DAVE Vs. GOVT OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, in this petition, after having worked for 34 years, as an Academician in the Faculty of Commerce of respondent No.3-University, has not been paid the pensionary benefits, including Gratuity and other incidental benefits, arising out of the service and employment with respondent No.3, though she has retired almost 5 years before; and having failed in receiving due and payable pensionary benefits, and despite repeated and sincere efforts, as a measure of last resort, she has knocked the doors of this Court by invocation of the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia seeking directions against the respondent authorities for payment of retiral dues and benefits.

(2.) With a view to evaluate and examine the merits of the petition and the challenge against it, let there be, at the outset, spectrum of material facts and skeleton projection of the profile of the basis for claiming the pensionary benefits, which have been denied, despite the fact that the petitioner has retired almost 5 years before. Preambular Profile of Facts : After having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties and considering the relevant and material facts emerging from the record of the present petition, the following aspects have emerged unquestionably :

(3.) It will be seen from the aforesaid factual matrix that despite serious efforts and endeavours, as well as, the representations by and on behalf of the petitioner, by the University, the Education Department did not resolve the avoidable controversy, and again despite the fact that, similarly, situated seven other cases were taken up by the Government and permission was granted for the entitlement of the pension, and, as a result of which, the petitioner was left with no alternative but to seek judicial redressal. That is how the petition is on hand.