JOGINDER LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice to the respondents. Mr. K.D.S. Kotwal, Dy.AG waives notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. Vishal Sharma, ASGI for respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner after serving the department of the respondents came to be superannuated on 31.03.2019. It is also contended that the respondents No. 1 to 3 recommended the case of the petitioner for settlement of pensionary and other retiral benefit according to last pay received by the petitioner, but, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 instead of settling the pension of the petitioner and other retiral benefits according to the last pay received by him settled the same on a lower pay scale without taking into consideration the last pay drawn by the petitioner.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that case for settlement of pensionary benefits though was recommended by the competent authority, but is not being settled by respondent Nos. 4 and 5, thereby depriving him and his family of their right to get the only source of sustenance.