JAGDISH DUTT NARGOTRA Vs. STATE AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is averred in this writ petition that respondents have wrongly fixed the pension and have wrongly assessed the retiral benefits while holding that the pay of the petitioner was wrongly fixed. It is further stated that the pay fixation was done wrongly by the concerned officer- authority at the relevant point of time. Feeling aggrieved by communication issued by the respondents, petitioner has questioned the same through the medium of this writ petition and has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing Pension Payment Order No. PPO-Cell/J/04-05/3386-88 dated 28.04.2004 and for directions to the respondents to fix the retiral benefits on the basis of last pay drawn by the petitioner at Rs. 11025/- instead of Rs. 10750/- and pay pension accordingly, with a further direction to respondents to release the withheld amount of Rs. 70,000/- which had been withheld from his retirement gratuity.

(2.) Admittedly the pay of the petitioner was fixed in the year 1987 and the petitioner reached the age of superannuation on 31.3.2004 The retiral benefits had to be calculated in terms of Article 242 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations and last ten months pay has to be taken into consideration for fixation of the pension

(3.) I have examined the photocopy of the service book which has been annexed with the writ petition, perusal whereof shows that no objection was ever raised by either the department or by the competent authority right from 1987 till 2004 to the fixation of the pay of the petitioner. Therefore, keeping in view the mandate of Article 242 of the CSR above, and the ratio of judgments of this Court passed in Perdhuman Krishan Khullar v. Union of India, 2003 3 JKJ 423, Mulakh Raj v. Union of India, SWP No. 341/2003 decided. on 3.11.2006, Bhushan Kumar v. Union of India, SWP No. 1065/2006, decided on 5.4.2007, Maryam Bano v. State and ors, 2003 1 SCT 770 and a judgment of a Letters Patent Bench in LPA (OW) No. 200/2002 State v. Mohd Aziz Khan, decided on 21.8.2002, the respondents are not within their right to rectify the error, deduct the pension and effect the recovery from the petitioner. They had to fix the pension of the petitioner on the basis of the salary last drawn by him and have to calculate the pensionary benefits accordingly.