STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. D.T. ACHARYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned AGP for the petitioners. The petitioners by way of this petition under Articles >226 and >227 of the Constitution of India have approached this Court for the following reliefs:

(2.) Facts in brief leading to filing this petition, as could be gathered from the petition deserve to be set out as under: 2. 1 The present respondent was retired on 30.11.2004 from the office of the petitioner no.3 on the post of Additional Assistant Engineer and after retirement from the service, he filed the pension papers for getting the gratuity and other pensionary benefits. The petitioner no.1 had made payment of temporary pension and other benefits except the gratuity and informed the present respondent by way order dated 27.09.2006 that earlier order which was passed for pay fixation on 09.03.2001, was revised on 27.09.2006 because his pay was wrongly fixed from 01.06.1987 and he was getting the higher pay scale of Rs. 1,640-2900/- instead of Rs. 1,400-2,300/-, due to oversight basic pay was fixed as Rs. 2,375/- instead of Rs. 2,300/-. Therefore he was getting excess amount of Rs. 75/- per month plus other allowances. 2. 2 Being aggrieved by the same, the respondent has preferred Appeal No. 194 of 2006 before the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal. Thereafter, by an undertaking filed by the respondent the appeal was withdrawn, as the final pension of the respondent was fixed. The petitioner authorities have made the payment of the amount except the amount of Rs. 41,293/-. The petitioner thereafter filed appeal being Appeal No. 132 of 2007 before the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 20.10.2008 partly allowed the appeal and the order passed by the authorities dated 27.09.2006 and 03.02.2007 was rejected and the petitioner was directed to make the payment of Rs. 41,293/- with 12% interest. 2. 3 Hence, being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent approached this Court with the present petition.

(3.) Learned AGP for the petitioners contended that the order impugned before the Tribunal for rectifying the mistake occurred in pay fixation of the present respondent needed no interference and the same should have been quashed and set aside.