RISHIPALSINGH Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner has claimed revised pension as per the Government Resolution dated 22 nd June, 2009 and balance amount of Gratuity. The petitioner was an employee of Nagpur Municipal Corporation and serving as a Medical Officer (Health Department) from 10/7/1982 to 31/7/2008. He served continuously for 26 years. The petitioner retired on 31 st July, 2008. After his retirement, 6th Pay Commission came into force and was made applicable to the retired employee from 01 st January, 2006 as per the Government Resolution dated 27 th December, 2018. However, the respondent - N.M.C. did not make it applicable from the above dates but it was made applicable from 01 st December, 2010. The respondent- N.M.C. had not revised his pension as per 6 th Pay Commission. The petitioner has made several representations to revise his basic pay, the respondent-authority has revised his pension incorrectly @ Rs.15,612.00. As per the contention of the petitioner, he is entitled to receive pension in view of Government Resolution No.SNV1009/PK33/SEVA-4 dtd. 22/6/2009. In view of the said Government Resolution, clause No.6 - an employees who have completed 20 years of service are qualified to get the retirement benefit i.e. pension by calculating 50% of last basic pay. His last month's basic pay at the time of retirement was Rs.32,070.00, and therefore, his pension ought to have been calculated at 50% of last basic pay. But the respondent has calculated his pension without considering the Government Resolution dated 22 nd June, 2009. The petitioner further claimed that he had received the Gratuity of Rs.2,50,000.00 on his retirement and this amount is also wrongly calculated. In the Government Resolution dated 22 nd June, 2009 in para No.7, the formula for calculating the gratuity amount is provided which says that 16.5 times of the basic pay or Rs.5,00,000.00 whichever is less would be considered as the gratuity amount for the full service of 33 years. The petitioner had completed 26 years of service and hence the days for gratuity amount period is to be calculated as 15 days for one year of service, and therefore, his paid days for gratuity have been calculated as 390 days i.e. 13 months, therefore, the gratuity amount should have been Rs.4,16,910.00 but the respondent authority paid Rs.2,50,000.00 which is less. It is further contention of the petitioner that he had filed Writ Petition No.1934 of 2022 before this Court for seeking same relief. At the relevant time, this Court has directed the petitioner to put his demand with the Employer - N.M.C. and liberty was granted to him to file the writ petition if it is not considered. As per the order of this Court he had made representation on 13 th June, 2022 but the respondent authority has not considered the said representation nor given any reply to the said representation, therefore, he constrains to file the present writ petition.

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is opposed by the respondent - N.M.C. on the ground that the present petition is liable to be dismissed summarily on the ground of delay and laches. The petitioner stood retired from service on 31/7/2008 and as per rules the petitioner was paid pension since the month of August 2008. The 5 th Pay Commission was made applicable to the petitioner in the year 2010 with effect from 1/1/2006. The petitioner has approached to this Court after lapse of almost 10 years and has not given any explanation much less sufficient cause for approaching this Court after lapse of more than 10 years. Hence, the present petition is liable to be dismissed.