ASHOK NATTHUPPA SHELGENWAR Vs. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner claims to belong to Lingedar Scheduled Caste. He was appointed as a Lecturer at the respondent No.4 College on 9/7/1988. According to the petitioner, despite aforesaid, his caste certificate was not referred to the Scrutiny Committee for a considerable period of time. It was only in the year 2013 that the said claim was referred. Pursuant to the order passed in Writ Petition No.7020/2013 (Ashok Natthuppa Shelgenwar V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others) dtd. 26/2/2016 the Scrutiny Committee was directed to decide the petitioner's claim. Despite aforesaid, the claim was pending. The petitioner superannuated on 31/10/2020. Thereafter on 2/11/2020 the Scrutiny Committee passed an order of invalidation. Since the petitioner's retiral benefits have been withheld he has preferred the present writ petition raising challenge to the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee as well the action withholding the petitioner's retiral benefits.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is not desirous of challenging the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dtd. 2/11/2020. He has restricted his prayer to the release of the retiral benefits. In that regard, it is submitted that the petitioner's retiral benefits have been withheld without any legal justification. Though the respondent No.4 College had forwarded the petitioner's papers to the office of the Accountant General and on 19/1/2021 the pension has been sanctioned, the amount was not being released. Placing reliance on the decision in the case of State of Jharkhand and others V/s. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and another reported in (2013) 12 SCC 210 it is submitted that in absence of any statutory prohibition, the petitioner's retiral benefits could not have been withheld. He further submits that this view has been reiterated in the subsequent decision in Civil Appeal Nos.1770-1771 of 2023 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition [Civil] Nos.5356-5357/2003 and Diary No.15448/2020) (R Sundaram V/s. The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee & Ors.) decided on 17/3/2023. Similarly inviting attention to paragraphs 72 and 73 of the decision in the case of Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India and others V/s. Jagdish Balaram Bahira and others reported in (2017) 8 SCC 670 it is submitted that the petitioner's retiral benefits ought to be released.