PREM KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, JHARKHAND, RANCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has sought for direction upon the respondents to fix the monthly pension on the basis of last pay drawn and for payment of gratuity and benefit of two Assured Career Progression though granted with effect from the year 1999. The petitioner has further prayed for direction to the respondents to pay all the post retiral benefits with compound interest at the prevailing bank rate.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts is that the petitioner joined as the Typist Clerk in the year 1973. After completion of 32 years of services he took voluntary retirement under voluntary retirement scheme of the Government of Jharkhand while posted in the office of Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Department, Saraikella-Kharsawan. After voluntary retirement the information was submitted to the department with regard to the fact that there is no liability of the petitioner nor any departmental proceeding is pending but for the callous and indifferent attitude of the respondents the petitioner has been paid only provisional pension in spite of several representations. That apart the petitioner has not been paid gratuity, benefits of two ACP which were granted to him in the year 1999. Being aggrieved by the lackadaisical attitude of the respondents, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievance.

(3.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted with vehemence that there has been no allegation of any fraud or misrepresentation against the petitioner but vide order as appears in Annexure-4 and 4/A of the rejoinder, the pay scale of the petitioner has been downgraded and the order of recovery has been passed in the year 2009 much after the voluntary retirement of the petitioner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has also further referred to the Annexure-5 to the supplementary affidavit dated 09.02010, wherein the letter dated 16.02.2010 of the Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Department, Saraikella-Kharsawan has been annexed as Annexure-5, whereby there has been direction for stoppage of pension of the petitioner. Learned senior counsel further submits that Rule 136 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules envisages with the amount of pension that may be granted is determined by length of service and Rule 151 envisages that the term "Emoluments" as used in respect of the ordinary pensions means the emoluments which the Government servant was receiving immediately before his retirement. Moreover, the rectification has been made by the respondent authorities much after the retirement which cannot be legally tenable. Learned senior counsel has referred to the judgment of this Court (Baijnath Ram vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors., (2015) 4 JCR 691) in support of his contentions.