LAWS(HPH)-2021-6-32

CHAMAN LAL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF H. P.

Decided On June 28, 2021
Chaman Lal Gupta Appellant
V/S
STATE OF H. P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner's wife, one Dr. Suman Gupta superannuated from service on 31.10.2005. During the tenure of her service, she was in receipt of Non Practicing Allowance (NPA). The grant of NPA was in terms of Fundamental Rule ( (21) (a)(i) read with Fundamental Rule 9 (21(a)(ii), and, Rules whereof, read as under:-

(2.) The grievance(s) as ventilated by the petitioner, in the extant writ petition, is with respect of a notification, borne in Annexure A-4, made on 26th August, 2009, wherethrough, though benefits of 25% NPA of basic pay, for the purpose of calculating retiral benefits including revised pension became restricted only to the serving as well as to those doctors who retired on and after 1..1.2006, and hence it became denied to the wife of the petitioner, one Dr. Suman Gupta, who was pre 2006 retiree(s). Consequently, the writ petitioner, pray for the afore Annexure A-4, rather making the afore restrictions, being quashed and set aside. Moreover, the writ petitioner also cast a challenge upon the notifications respectively made on 14.10.2009, and, 21.05.2013, as respectively embodied in Annexure A-5, Annexure A-6, wherethrough, the benefit(s) of component of 25% NPA as a part of basic pay, for the purpose of calculating retiral benefits, has been denied to those retirees, whose superannuation occurred w.e.f. 2.12.1997 and 1.1.2006.

(3.) The afore grievances as ventilated in the writ petition, and, in respect whereof, a mandamus for theirs being quashed and set aside, is, asked, for being pronounced by this Court, is not longer res integra, and/or is covered by a verdict made by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in a case titled as Dr. D.R. Barwal ( now deceased) through his legal representatives Smt. Usha Barwal & others vs. State of H.P. & Others, bearing CWPOA No. 1184 of 2020, decided on 04.05.2021. Consequently, the stand in opposition to the writ claim as reared by the State of Himachal Pradesh does not carry any profound weight, and, nor is legally sustainable.