BISHANI DEVI Vs. MALAK SINGH JAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed C.W.P.No.1336 of 1996 seeking a direction for releasing the retiral benefits for the service rendered by her deceased husband. The writ petition was allowed on 29.7.1996 and a direction was issued to the respondents to issue necessary sanction and also to grant interest at the rate of 18% to the petitioner from the date the amount was due till the actual payment thereof. Alleging non-compliance of the aforesaid order, this contempt petition has been filed.

(2.) In response to the show cause notice, a stand has been taken on behalf of the Executive Officer of the Municipal Council that all the retiral benefits admissible to the petitioner, in view of the service rendered by her deceased husband, have been released. The petitioner, however, seriously disputed the bald stand taken by the first respondent. Consequently and in order to ensure that whatever is found due should be released to the petitioner, Mr.Sarban Singh, IAS, Director, Urban Development, Haryana was impleaded as respondent No.3, who appears to have intervened in the matter.

(3.) Resultantly and on recomputation of the retiral benefits, the petitioner has been further paid a sum of about Rs.60,000/-. As directed by this Court, the first respondent has also filed a statement of account (Annexure R3/1) along with the written statement. As per the same, the petitioner appears to have been paid gratuity after calculating the same on the basis of basic pay drawn by her deceased husband. Mr.Mani Ram Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has referred to the instructions issued by the Finance Department, Government of Haryana circular letter No.1/4(93)/89-2 FR-II, dated 8.3.1996 in terms whereof the retirees were held entitled to the benefit of Dearness Allowance component for the purpose of calculation of gratuity at the rates prescribed in the instructions. He has also brought to my notice a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated September 23, 2005 passed in C.W.P.No.7446 of 2003 wherein the above-stated instructions, to the extent of prescription of the cut-off date, were challenged and this Court after declaring the cut-off date to be wholly irrelevant for the purpose of enhanced pensionary benefits payable to the retirees, has held that "all retirees who are retired/died earlier or after April 1, 1995 would be entitled to the revised pensionary benefits, as per the decision Annexure P-1." The decision Annexure P-1 mentioned in the above-quoted operated part of the judgment are the instructions dated 8.3.1996.