Allowed

Smt. Shraddha Nene v. the Registrar, Banaras Hindu University and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2022WRIA/4361/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking gratuity and pension for her deceased husband. It directed the Commissioner Higher Education, M.P., to release funds deposited by Vikram University to Banaras Hindu University for payment to the petitioner, as both universities confirmed the amounts were not disputed.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 4 directed to release Rs. 30,22,027/- (pension) and Rs. 8,38,248/- (gratuity) deposited by Vikram University to Banaras Hindu University within one month.

Smt. Shraddha Nene Vs the Registrar… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4361 of 2022

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Shraddha Nene Respondent :- The Registrar, Banaras Hindu University And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Krishna Raj Singh Jadaun,Pooja Agarwal,Rohit Upadhyay

¶6

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Pooja Agarwal learned counsel for the Banaras Hindu University.

¶9

Sri Rohit Upadhyay learned counsel who had filed appearance and counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 2 namely Vikram University, Ujjain has not appeared.

¶10

Office report dated 23.8.2022 reveals that service of respondent No. 4-Commissioner Higher Education, M.P., Bhopal is complete. However, none had appeared. Even today, none appears for that respondent. Accordingly, the matter has been proceeded.

¶11

Present writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-

¶12

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make full & final payment of Gratuity, arrear of pension and regular family pension along with 18% interest on delayed payment to the petitioner."

¶13

The facts as are undisputed between the petitioner, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (in short 'BHU') and Vikram University, Ujjain M.P. (in short' Vikram University') are, petitioner's husband Dr. Shomnath Nene was appointed Lecturer Sanskrit at Vikram University on 01.8.1981. He continuously worked at that University till he joined

¶14

¶15

the BHU on the post of Professor on 30.8.2007. He worked at that University till his retirement on 31.3.2019. During his years of service at BHU, the deceased (Dr. Shomnath Nene) requested BHU to include his past services rendered at Vikram University as part of the services rendered by him. On that request, BHU issued necessary communications to Vikram University to enquire as to the status and correctness of the claim made by the husband of the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the Vikram University confirmed the claim made by the husband of the petitioner.

¶16

However, no amount came to be paid out to the petitioner towards gratuity or pension since the necessary communication regarding computation and commensurate payment was never released by the Commissioner Higher Education, M.P. Bhopal with respect to the amounts payable to late Dr. Shomnath Nene under those heads, by Vikram University. Claim for GPF has been honoured by the Vikram University, proportionate amount due from BHU has also been computed and paid out. However pro rata pension and Death-cumretirement gratuity has not been paid out. Counter affidavit filed by the BHU supports the case of the petitioner.

¶17

In paragraph-20 and 21 of the writ petition, it has been stated as below:-

¶18

"20. That, meanwhile in pursuance of regular request send by BHU and the petitioner's husband, the VU vides its letter 20.08.2014 admitted that entire service benefits due to Dr. Somnath Nene has been deposited with the respondent no. 4, and further requested to send the so deposited amount to BHU. A copy of letter dated 20.08.2014 issued by the VU to the respondent no. 4 is being annexed as Annexure No. 8 to this writ petition.

¶19

21.That during this regarding fixation of pay, amount of gratuity etc. various conversation taken place among the parties. However ultimately vide its letter dated 28.09.2016 the BHU admitted that "the accumulated amount of lump-sum-Pension and DCR Gratuity in respect of Dr. Som Nath Nene has to be remitted to this University" and issued request in this

¶20

¶21

regard. A copy of letter dated 28.09.2016 issued by BHU to the VU is being annexed as Annexure No. 9 to this writ petition."

¶22

Further, paragraph-34 of the writ petition reads as below:-

¶23

"34. That, informing the order of the Hon'ble Court, the BHU on dated 17.01.2022 and 31.01.2022 again requested to the respondent no. 4 i.e. Commissioner Higher Education, M.P. Government, Bhopal to release Rs. 38,60,275/- (Rs.30,22,027+ 8,38,248) as retirement & gratuity pending towards the petitioner. But till date there is no response from the respondent no. 4. A copy of the letter dated 17.01.2022 & 31.01.2022 send by BHU to the respondent no. 4 are being annexed as Annexure No. 20.”

¶24

In reply, contents of paragraph-13, 14 and 19 of the counter affidavit filed by the Vikram University read as below:-

¶25

"13. That the contents of para 20 of the writ petition are matter of record hence need no comments. However it is reiterated that entire service benefits payable to the petitioners husband were deposited by the Vikram University before respondent No. 4 (Commissioner Higher Education, 5th Floor, Satpura Bhawan, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh) and the Commissioner Higher Education was requested to transmit the said amount to the account of Banaras Hindu University.

¶26

That the contents of para 21 of the writ petition are matter of record hence need no reply However it is stated that whatever was due to be paid to the petitioner's Husband as a lumpsum pension and D.C.R. Gratuity were already deposited with the Commissioner Higher Education, Madhya Pradesh, who was requested to remit the same to the Banaras Hindu University.

¶27

That the contents of para 34 of the writ petition need no reply from the answering respondent. Now the matter is between the Banaras Hindu University and The Commissioner Higher Education, Madhya Pradesh (Respondent No. 4)."

¶28

Then, BHU had earlier written to Vikram University on 09.5.2019 seeking confirmation of the amounts of pension and Death-cumretirement gratuity computed on pro-rata basis that may be payable by the said Vikram University. Contents of that letter read as under:-

¶29

"कुलसचिचिव

¶30

िव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय व

¶31

उज्जैन व456 010 (म.प.)

¶32

¶33

िवषय: िनवነቈकችቈኌका व(Pension) लाभ वहेतु विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय वमे वडॉ. सचोमनाथनेने्ቛ ारा वआचिायर व(सचंस्कነቈत वअध्ययनशाला) के वरूप वमे वकी वगई वपर኏वर वसचेवा वअवकችधि वकी गणना वके वसचंरታभर वमे

¶34

महोरታय,

¶35

कነቈपया वउपरो्ሹ विवषयक वइसच वकायारलय वके वप्ቔांक वएबी व/ 5 पी-366/46988 िरታनांक 16.01.2019 का वसचंरታभर व्ቇहण वकरे व(पितकችलिप वसचंलग) कችजसचके व्ቛारा वडॉ. सचोमनाथ नेने व्ቛारा वआचिायर व(सचंस्कነቈत वअध्ययनशाला) के वरूप वमे विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय वकी वगई पर኏वर वसचेवा वअवकችधि वकी विनवነቈकችቈኌका वलाभ वहेतु वआनुपाितक विनवነቈकችቈኌका वएवं वडी. सची. आर.्ቇे च्युइटी वकी वरािश विनवነቈकችቈኌका वलाभ वहेतु वपेिषत वकरने वका वअनुरोधि विकया वगया वथा, परन्तु वउपरो्ሹ वधिनरािश वइसच वकायारलय वको वअभी वतक वपा्቎ वनहीं वहुआ वहै।

¶36

अतः वआपसचे वपुनः वअनुरोधि वहै विक विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय वमे वडॉ. सचोमनाथ वनेने व्ቛारा आचिायर व(सचंस्कነቈत वअध्ययनशाला), के वरूप वमे वकी वगई वपर኏वर वसचेवा वअवकችधि व(िरታनांक 01.08.1981 सचे व15.11.2007 तक) की विनवነቈकችቈኌफा वलाभ वहेतु विनम्नकችलकችखित अिभलेखि वएवं वधिनरािश व(सचंलग वपिरकलन- प्ቔ वके वअनुसचार) पेिषत वकरने वकी वकነቈपा करे-

¶37

आनुपाितक विनवነቈकችቈኌका वकी वधिनरािश- 30,22,027/-

¶38

डी. सची. आर. ्ቇेच्युइटी वकी वधिनरािश- 8,38,248/-

¶39

सचेवा वपुकችस्तका वको वअ्ቕतन वसचत्यािपत वपितकችलिप,

¶40

उपरो्ሹ वधिनरािश व'कुलसचिचिव, काशी विहन्रታर኏ विवश्विव्ቕालय' के वप्ቌ वमे व ाराणसची वमे रታेव वपर኏वरक विडमांड वडराफ्ट वया वचिेक वके वमाध्यम वसचे वपेिषत वकरने वका वक्ቖ वकरे।

¶41

सचंलगक वउपरो्ሹ व।"

¶42

In reply to the above, Vikram University confirmed the contents of letter dated 09.5.2019 issued by BHU vide its communication dated 12.6.2019. Relevant extract of that communication reads as below:-

¶43

¶44

"्ቅमांक व/ पशासचन व/ सचंस्थापन व/ िश्ቌकीय व/ 2019/690 िरታनांक 12.06.2019

¶45

पित,

¶46

कुलसचिचिव,

¶47

काशी विहन्रታर኏ विवश्विव्ቕालय.

¶48

वाराणसची व(उ.प.)।

¶49

िवषयः विनवነቈकችቈኌ व(पेशन) लाभ वहेतु विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय वमे वडॉ. सचोमनाथ वनेने व्ቛारा आचिायर व(सचंस्कነቈत वअध्ययनशाला) के वरूप वमे वकी वगई वपर኏वर वसचेवा वअवकችधि वकी वगणना वके सचंरታभर वमे। व

¶50

सचंरታभर व:-आपका वप्ቔ व्ቅमांक व/ एबी व/ 5-पी-366, िरታनांक व09.05.2019 |

¶51

महोरታय,

¶52

उपयुर्ሹ विवषय वमे वलेखि वहै विक वआपके व्ቛारा वसचंरታिभरत वप्ቔ वमे वडॉ. सचोमनाथ वनेने, आचिायर वकी वआनुपाितक वरािश, ्ቇेज्युटी वएवं वअवकाश वनगरታीकरण वतथा वअन्य वचिाही गयी वजानकारी विनम्नानुसचार वहै व:1. डॉ. सचोमनाथ वनेने वकी विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय, उज्जैन वमे वसचेवारत वरहने वपर वपेशन-्ቇे ज्युटी विनयो्ሹा वअशंरታान वकी वरािश विव्ቅम विवश्विव्ቕालय, उज्जैन व्ቛारा वपत्येक माह वआयु्ሹ , म.प. शासचन, उच्च ि श्ቌा विवभाग, भोपाल वको वभेजी वजा वचिुकी वहै, अतः आनुपाितक विनकችधि वकी वधिनरािश विवश्विव्ቕालय व्ቛारा वभुगतान वनहीं वकी वजा वसचकती है।

¶53

डॉ. सचोमनाथ वनेने वकी विनयुि्ሹ विरታनांक व01.08.1981 सचे व15.11.2007 तक वपेशन / ्ቇेज्युटी विनयो्ሹा वफण्ड वरािश वके वसचंबंधि वमे वप्ቔ वआयु्ሹ वउच्च ि श्ቌा विवभाग, सचतपुडा भवन, भोपाल वको वभेजा वजा वचिुका वहै।

¶54

¶55

Thus, it appears there is no dispute between the two Universities as to the correct amount payable to the petitioner. Also, there is no dispute amongst the two Universities with respect to the entitlement of the petitioner. Entire payment is held up (to the petitioner) occasioned by the fact, according to the BHU relevant account head can be created and payment released in favour of the petitioner only once the payments are made/initiated at the end of the Vikram University as the deceased had first served at that institution. Second, according to Vikram University the entire amount has been deposited by it with the Commissioner Higher Education, M.P. Bhopal. Despite notice issued to the said respondent, none has appeared on his behalf and there is no objection to the claim.

¶56

Considering the above, writ petition is allowed . A position direction is issued to respondent No. 4 to forthwith release the entire amount deposited by Vikram University with that authority against services rendered by the deceased Dr. Shomnath Nene both towards pro rata pension and pro rata Death-cum-retirement gratuity quantified at Rs. 30,22,027/- and 8,38,248/- respectively. Such compliance may be made within a month from the service of a copy of this order.

¶57

It is further provided, in case any lesser amount has been deposited by the Vikram University than has been disclosed in communication dated 12.6.2019, quoted above, due communication of the exact period for which deposit has been made by that University and the amount that may have been deposited, would be made to the petitioner with the same time period.

¶58

Upon receipt of such payment by the BHU, the University shall release proportionate amount of pension and gratuity. Thus, if the entire amount as claimed by the petitioner is received by BHU,it will proceed to release that amount alongwith the further amounts that are

¶59

¶60

due to the petitioner by way of pension and Death-cum-retirement gratuity. If any lesser amount is received, it may remain open to the BHU to release proportionate lesser amount under those head within a period of one month from the date of receipt of amounts from the Commissioner Higher Education, M.P., Bhopal. In that event also, BHU would issue requisite communication to the petitioner containing the exact reasons for computation and release of lesser amount/s.

¶61

Order Date :- 17.11.2022 Faraz

¶62

Digitally signed by FARAZ AHMAD Date: 2022.11.18 16:24:47 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Shraddha Nene v. the Registrar, Banaras Hindu University and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shraddha Nene v. the Registrar, Banaras Hindu University and 3 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

Smt. Prieeti Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Shashi Singh Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Dr. Pallavi Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Priti Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gulista Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others