LOON KARAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondents to release the annual grade increment to the petitioner on completion of his service of one year from 1.3.90 by computing the post retirement benefits. It has been prayed that the respondents may be directed to pay interest to the petitioner 24% p.a. on the amount which though due but was not paid on the due date.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed on 5.9.92. Notice to show cause was issued on 14.9.92. In pursuance of the notice, the non-petitioners have put in appearance and filed reply. It has been stated that the annual grade increment is due on completion of one year's service under Rule 31 of the Rajasthan Service Rules and it is granted to those who remain in Government service on the date it is due. Under the provisions of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, an increment is an attachment to the pay, as defined in rule 7(24) which is invariably drawn by a Government Servant under rule 29 of the Rajasthan Service Rules but as the petitioner had already been retired on 28.2.1991 and as such, he was no longer a Government Servant on 13.1991 and thus obviously he cannot get both pension and pay on 1.3.1991. It has been stated that under rule 56 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, a Government Servant, whose date of birth is 1st of a month, is retired on afternoon of the last day of the proceeding month and accordingly, the petitioner whose date of birth was 13.1993, was rightly retired on 28.2.1991 and he has not challenged his retirement order. It has also been stated that the petitioner himself is responsible for the delay caused in the payment of post-retirement benefits, inasmuch as necessary verification of his service was not got done by him from the office of the Government Advocate, Jodhpur. So much so, his Last Pay Certificate issued by the Government Advocate on 15.12.1990 was not proper and correct and which had to be returned and got completed from him, as is clear from the letter dated 4.4.1991 written to the Government Advocate, Jodhpur (Anx. R/1). Thus, the petitioner is not entitled to the interest for the delay by him. It has been further stated that the petitioner himself could not get his service book in time from the office of Government Advocate, Jodhpur before being retired on 20.2.1991. The respondents.have also stated that in order to dispose of his pension case expeditiously a supernumerary post of A.L.R. had to be got created from 21.2.1991 to 28.2.1991 in consultation with the Finance Department, as the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Jaipur refused to accept him on duty on 21.2.1991 as there was no vacant post. It was only after the creation of his post that his salary and other benefits could be given. The petitioner has concealed this important fact from the Court and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this count alone.

(3.) The case has come up before me today and as agreed by the counsel for the parties, the matter is heard family.