HARI SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM KISHUN SINGH, RESIDENT OF QUARTER NO. 314, SECTOR Vs. HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED, A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 5/11, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, HASTINGS, KOLKATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to pay forthwith all retiral benefits taking into consideration the date of retirement to be 30.06.2006 on the pay scale of Rs.12,000-18,000.00 with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of superannuation till payment and also to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of Manager, with all consequential monetary and service benefits, including the allowances arbitrarily withheld by the respondents.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case in brief is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Assistant on 24.07.1973 and he was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant on 08.10.1977. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Office Superintendent (G) on 06.02.1985 and thereafter, in Feb., 1992, he was promoted to the post of Sec. Officer. The respondent-Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited (a Government of India undertaking) had earlier accepted the offer of the petitioner for voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme w.e.f. 31.05.2003, against which the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P(S) No. 2583 of 2003, which was disposed of on 05.12.2003 holding, inter alia, that the petitioner should be reinstated on the post and should be allowed to continue in the service till he attains the age of superannuation. It was also held, inter alia, that the petitioner should be entitled for the consequential benefits including the salary of the intervening period. Thereafter, the respondents filed Letters Patent Appeal being LPA No. 37 of 2004. Subsequently, in compliance of order dated 29.04.2004 passed in Contempt Case (C) No. 33 of 2004, the respondents paid the arrear of salary to the petitioner from the period w.e.f. 25.04.2003 to July 2003. Thereafter, the respondents vide letter dated 07/11.06.2005 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition), communicated the petitioner that since he had already attained the age of superannuation i.e., 58 years as on 19.06.2004, therefore, he should be treated to be retired w.e.f. 30.06.2004.