UPENDRA NATH DUBEY Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the petitioner, i.e, the applicant herein, relying upon paragraph 29 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents. Paragraph 29 of the counter-affidavit is quoted herein below:-

(2.) A reply has been filed to I.A. No. 10 of 2020 by the respondents in which they admit that they had analysed and made re-verification of various entitlements and pay/salary which the petitioner was entitled to under the law and to find out whether correct calculation had been made at the time of paying/making over the salary to the petitioner. According to the respondents, it was only while the respondents made the recalculation that the respondents found out that while the writ petitioner was entitled to a grade pay of Rs.6,700/- per month, due to inadvertence, the respondents continued to apply grade pay of Rs.6,200/- per month. The said respondents further submit that having found out the mistake, the disclosure was made in paragraph 29 quoted above. According to the respondents, the arrear amount of Rs.2,87,400/- has been calculated by the respondents which included all the other consequential benefits which are dependent upon the grade pay amount. The benefits have been calculated and filed by the respondents as Annexure R/1.

(3.) According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the respondents have already processed the file for payment of arrears to the petitioner, but it would take some time before it is actually done. For the said purpose, he seeks four weeks' time to do so.