JAY PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against an order of the Superintendent of Police, Shamli dtd. 8/7/2016, holding that the petitioner's date of birth was 13/6/1954 and not 13/6/1955 and that, therefore, he had served an extra year beyond his age of superannuation. The order on this premise directs recovery of a year's salary that the petitioner had drawn beyond his date of superannuation reckoned on the basis of his date of birth being 13/4/1954.

(2.) Apart from questioning the recovery, the petitioner also prays that a mandamus be granted, ordering the respondents to pay the petitioner his provident fund, commuted value of pension, leave encashment and further to pay his final pension instead of a provisional pension. The petitioner also claims arrears of pension due on account of regular pension together with interest.

(3.) The petitioner retired as a Sub-Inspector (Special Category) from the State Police upon attaining the age of superannuation on 30/6/2015. He was last posted at Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli. He was a Group-C employee. After retirement, the petitioner was sanctioned a provisional pension, paid his gratuity and group insurance, but not the provident fund, commuted pension, leave encashment and final pension.