DHANI DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "That the respondents No.1 to 3 may be directed to make due entries in the service book of the applicant with regard to the grant of proficiency increments w. e. f. 1.1.1986 and consequently, arrive at the revised last pay which would have been drawn by the applicant on the date of retirement. ii. That the respondents No. 1 to 3 may be directed to fix the pay of the applicant at Rs.1485/ - as on 1.1.1993 and thereafter give due increments as per the notifications issued by Finance department regarding revision of pay scales and grant of master scale from time to time and consequently fix the last pay of the applicant at Rs.1580/ - on the date of retirement. iii That the respondents No.1 to 3 may be directed to send the corrected service books as prayed for in prayers (1) and (ii) to the respondent No.4 and respondent No.4 may be directed to consequently issue revised PPO or any other order in favour of the applicant for the payment of revised pension and arrears of other pensionary benefits permissible under law to the applicant, immediately within reasonable period. iv. That the respondents No. 1 to 3 may be directed to pay interest @18% per annum to the applicant on the arrears of pensionary benefits payable to her on account of her correct fixation of pay as prayed for above from 31.7.1995 till the date of realisation of the same, in the interest of justice; v. Any other order in the circumstances of the case as deemed fit may also be passed in favour of the applicant. vi. That the respondents may be burdened with the cost of this application and they may also be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to this case".

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents and has also gone through the record.

(3.) The brief facts leading to_ the filing of the present original application are that the applicant retired as mid wife on 31.7.1995. According to the applicant for want of complete entries in her service book, her retiral benefits were assessed, settled and paid on the basis of lesser basic pay than the pay she was actually entitled to. Her representations dated 27.8.2004, 20.9.1994, 6.10.1994, 8,12.1994, 11.1.1995, 22.1.1995 and 24.1.1995 for making necessary entries in the service book did not yield any fruitful result which finally led to assessment and payment of lesser retiral benefits to her.