MUNNALAL AGARWAL Vs. MUNICIPAL BOARD, BILASPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to fix the pension of the petitioner and to restrain the respondent from withholding the General ,Provident Fund and Pension of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a teacher in an institution, known as S.R.M. Inter College Bisalpur, District Pilibbit by respondent No. 1, Municipal Board, Bisalpur, district Pilibhit. He was promoted by appointment as Principal of the college w.e.f. 1st July, 1970 in pursuance of the resolution of the respondent No. 1. The petitioner was suspended in 1971 and his service was terminated in the year 1972. Against, the order of termination passed by the respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal and the termination order was set aside. The Municipal Board, respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition No. 1288 of 1974 in this Court. The writ petition filed by the board was, dismissed by this Court, by order dated 30-4-1975. The petitioner was reinstated in service and he continued to function as a Principal of the college till the date of his retirement on 30th June, 1985. The petitioner was entitled to pension and General Provident Fund etc. after his retirement, he claimed pension etc. from the respondents.

(3.) An objection was raised that the petitioner was wrongly given four advance increments in the resolution passed by the Board in its meeting in the year 1970. It was first contended that the meeting was invalid. Secondly the petitioner could not be granted four advance increments at the time of his appointment as Principal. The respondent No. 5, Regional Assistant Account Officer, Pariksha Sangathan, submitted a report dated 2.6th May, 1986 holding that the petitioner was wrongly paid four advance increments. The report was submitted before respondent No. 3, District Inspector of Schools, Pillibhit. He found that no irregularity was committed. The petitioner has filed a copy of said report of District Inspector of Schools as Annexure-V to the writ petition. There is a dispute on the question as to whether the petitioner was entitled to four advance increments. The matter remained pending and the fixation of the pension of the petitioner could not be done. The petitioner thus approached this Court.