CHANDER KANTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who retired as a teacher on October 31, 1991, is aggrieved by the order dated August 11, 1993, by which her request for encashment of leave and the payment of interest on account of delay o reimbursement of retiral benefits, has been rejected, A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) The petitioner was employed as a teacher in a Government School. On February 12, 1985, she was placed under suspension on account of a criminal case regarding the death of her daughter-in-law having been registered against her. The petitioner was charged along with another for an offence under Section 302/34. The trial court acquitted them. The state of Punjab filed Criminal appeal No. 464/DBA of 1986. It was dismissed on August 26, 1991. As a result, the petitioner was reinstated in service vide order dated October 28, 1991. She retired after attaining the age of 58 years on October 31,1991.

(3.) The petitioner avers that after her acquittal, she was entitled to the payment of full pay and allowances for the period of suspension. Thereafter, on her retirement, various retiral benefits had accrued to her. As the respondents did not make the payment, she filed Civil Writ Petition No.7029 of 1992 on May 2, 1992. The Motion Bench directed the issue of a Show Cause Notice to the respondents. The respondents appeared. It was stated on their behalf that the petitioner had been paid an amount of Rs. 1,34,202.45. Learned counsel of the petitioner, however, claimed that she was entitled to the grant of interest and costs. The Motion Bench disposed of the of the writ petition with the observation that the petitioner may file a representation and directed the respondents to decide it within a period of two months by passing a speaking order and after hearing her. The writ petition was, accordingly disposed of on October 12, 1992. The petitioner filed a review petition No.314 of 1992. A claim for payment of amount due on account of encashment of leave was made. The Bench disposed of the review petition with a direction that the petitioner may file a representation before the concerned authorities "claiming leave encashment and if the authorities are convinced by the petitioner that she is entitled to leave encashment, the same would be granted in accordance with law and relevant rules". She was also permitted to make a claim regarding payment of interest and costs. After the disposal of this petition on January 19, 1993, the petitioner submitted a representation on February 10, 1993 to the District Education Officer, Rohtak. This representation having been rejected vide order dated August 11, 1993, she has approached this court again through the present writ petition.