MOTI LAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ petition was earlier come up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court. THE Division Bench vide its order, dated 24th March, 1988 allowed the petition directing the respon dents to pay the petitioners similar amount of pension including dearness allowance and family pension etc. admissible to State Government emplo yees or the employees of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur since July 2, 1981 within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them. In the order, it was clarified that the relief would not extend to payment of gratuity.

(2.) AGAINST the aforesaid order, SLP (Civil) No. 7917 of 1988 was pre ferred in the Supreme Court of India by the Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order, dated August 9, 1988 disposed of the Special Leave Petition as well as the appeal remitting the matter back to the High Court for decision with the following observations : ".. ..Since the writ petitioners seeks to rely on the other conten tions also, the appropriate course to adopt after hearing both the sides appears to be to grant special leave and to remit the matter back to the High Court for a decision on the remaining points also after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. We accordingly grant special leave and remit the matter to the High Court for the aforesaid purpose. We request the High Court to dispose of the matter as early as possible preferably within four months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court. We direct the order passed by the High Court should not be given effect to till the matter is finally dis posed of by the High Court on all points subject to any other order that may be passed by this Court. The appeal will stand disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs." In this way, the above writ petition again came up for hearing before us.

(3.) SRI Ashok Mohiley, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad urged that the Nagar Mahapalika did not have sufficient means for making payment of Dearness Allowance or family pension etc. as employees of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur have been getting. On account of lack of resources, there was inability of respondent No. 2 to pay the petitioners Dearness Allowance payable on the pension and family pension and other emoluments including gratuity etc. on equal level as U. P. Government employees or those of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur are paid.