MOHAMMAD MODASSIR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Shashikant Joshi for the Petitioner and Ms. Amira Razaq, Government Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2.

(2.) On 18/9/2019, we had made it clear that taking into consideration the issues raised in this Petition, this matter would be disposed of at the stage of admission. On the said date, we had granted liberty to the parties to complete their pleadings. The pleadings have now been completed and the matter has come up for final disposal. We accordingly grant Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent and at the request of the learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) Mr. Joshi for the Petitioner, at the very outset, states that several issues were raised in this Petition and most of them have been resolved. He submits that the only issue which remains to be resolved is that of part payment of retirement gratuity. He submits that according to the Petitioner, the Petitioner is required to be paid retirement gratuity by taking into consideration the proviso to Rule 12 of the Goa Panchayat Raj (Conditions of Service of State Election Commissioner) Rules, 1997 and the corresponding Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 (VIIth Pay Commission) as adopted by the State Government. He submits that in terms of these Rules, the total retirement gratuity payable to the Petitioner comes to approximately Rs.32.00 lakhs or thereabouts. He, however, submits that in terms of the Rules, based upon the recommendations of the VIIth Pay Commission, there is a ceiling of Rs.20.00 lakhs and accordingly, the Petitioner has restricted his claim to Rs.20.00 lakhs. Mr. Joshi points out that an amount of Rs.9,76,280.00 has already been paid to the Petitioner. He, therefore, submits that the present petition is now restricted to the recovery of balance amount of Rs.10,23,720.00, along with interest thereon for the delayed payment.