Allowed

Kaluaa v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2021WRIA/3629/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a writ petition filed by a retired 'Safai Karmchari' who was employed before attaining the age of 18 years. The court directed the State Government authorities to pay interest on his pension dues at 7% per annum from March 31, 2019, due to the delay in deciding his service period.

What did the court decide?

Directed authorities to pay interest @ 7% from expiry of three months from retirement date (31.03.2019) till the date of actual payment.

Kaluaa Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 35

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3629 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Kaluaa Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bare Lal,Pavan Kumar Srivastava,Ram Raksha Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vashishtha Tiwari,Vashistha Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Sri Ram Raksha Yadav, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri S.P.S. Rathore, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Sri Vashistha Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent no. 3, are present.

¶6

Affidavit filed by Sri S.P.S. Rathore, is taken on record.

¶7

Sri Vashistha Tiwari submits that all the dues of the petitioner, amounting to Rs. 16,17,812/- (sixteen lakhs seventeen thousand eight hundred twelve rupees) have been paid in his account with State Bank of India, Goverdhan Branch, Mathura on 27.09.2021, therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition.

¶8

Sri Ram Raksha Yadav submits that petitioner is entitled to interest for delayed payment. He prays for grant of interest on delayed payment.

¶9

Sri Vashistha Tiwari submits that State Government took time to decide the issue of entitlement of the petitioner, inasmuch as, he was appointed as 'Safai Karmchari' , prior to attaining the age of 18 years, therefore, directions were sought from the State Government as to how his earlier period of 4 years 8 months and 2 days is to be counted. It is submitted that file was sent to the State Government in August 2018, but State Government gave decision vide order dated 22.09.2021 and therefore, there is no delay on the part of respondent no. 3.

¶10

However, it is evident that pension papers of a regular employee should have been prepared much prior to his actual date of superannuation. If there were any ambiguities for clarification, then that should be sought prior to superannuation of the petitioner, but their prima facie appears to be delay on the part of the State Government in delaying the decision, as to the treatment of the period prior to petitioner attaining the age of 18 years, therefore, petitioner cannot be saddled with penal consequences for a state of indecision on the part of the State

¶11

Government and its authorities. Therefore, authorities are directed to pay interest @ 7% from the expiry of three months from the date of retirement i.e., from 31.03.2019 till the date of actual payment.

¶12

In above terms, petition is disposed off.

¶13

Personal appearance of respondent no. 3 is dispensed with. Order Date :- 28.9.2021 Vikram/-

Kaluaa v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaluaa v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khalid Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Km. Shaileja Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kanhaiya Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Markandey Ram Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kumari Eveline Milton Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others