An injured teacher challenged denial of pension and arrears. The High Court found the denial invalid, noted pension was sanctioned but delayed due to budget, and directed payment of dues and arrears.
Pension and arrears of increment to be paid; breach results in contempt liability.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:137150
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1063 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Sheelwati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Inspector of Girls School sought explanation from the respondent no. 4, committee of management, it is further claimed despite the fact notices were issued to the respondent no.4 institution to tender its reply but but no reply whatsoever was submitted. Compelled with the circumstances with regard to non-payment of salary the writ petitioner preferred writ in the year 1994 reference thereof has been given in para 10 of the writ petition in which a direction was issued to the Regional Inspectors of Girls School, Agra division Agra, to decide the claim of the petitioner on 09.03.1994 and thereafter the latter proceeded to pass an order dated 10.6.1994 directing the respondent no.4 to pay salary to the petitioner from its own sources and to submit document for approval of the appointment of the petitioner. In para 12 it has been further asserted that the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Mainpuri passed an order whereby the committee of management institution after following the procedure of law appointed the petitioner as assistant teacher by an order dated 20.08.1994 wherein it is specifically recorded that there are six permanent posts of assistant teacher in the institution in question out of which one is reserved for Schedule Caste category. In para 13 it has been further averred that the appointment of the petitioner as assistant teacher in LT grade was even confronted by one Smt. Siya Devi claiming herself to be lawfully appointed assistant teacher in LT grade and she filed writ petition no. 27612 of 1994 and 9779 of 1994 challenging appointment of the writ petitioner and prayed for payment of salary. In the said writ petition an interim order was passed but ultimately the interim order was vacated on 7.12.1994 and the stay application was rejected. It is further the case of the petitioner that the Regional Deputy Director of Education-II, Agra issued a letter on 23.2.1995 to the Second respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Mainpur directing him to do needful for the payment of salary to the petitioner. In compliance of the said order the Regional Deputy Director of Education-II, Agra by virtue of the order dated 2.3.1999 directed the manager of the committee of management to make payment of salary to the writ petitioner and in para 17 it has been further averred that the management submitted bills of payment of salary to the petitioner for the month of May 1995, which was duly sanctioned by the third respondent,
Accounts officer in the office of District Inspector of School, Mainpuri. It is further the case of the writ petitioner as portrayed in para 18 of the petition that the orders were passed by the second respondent for payment of salary and fixation of increments in that regard. In para 19 it has been averred that the committee of management started making the payment of salary to the petitioner but since the management was siding with Smt. Siya Devi so annual increments were not being accorded to the writ petitioner and thus on the repeated request of the petitioner the second respondent by virtue order dated 01.07.2003 fixed the salary of petitioner while granting increment for the year 1996 till 2002. It is further the case of the petitioner in para 21 of the writ petition that in the year 2008 the annual increment of the writ petitioner was fixed and salary was revised in accordance with the Government order dated 08.12.2008 and ultimately as stated in para 22 both the writ petitions preferred by Siya Devi namely 27612 of 1994 and 9779 of 1994 was dismissed for non prosecution. It is further the case of the petitioner that the second respondent also proceeded to fix the annual increments of the petitioner, however the same was not extended to the writ petitioner, thus the petitioner preferred Writ A 7141 of 2021 (Smt. Sheelwati Vs. State of UP) before this Court in which on 17.8.2021 an order was passed whereby the District Inspector of schools Mainpuri was directed to ensure compliance of its own order. In pursuance of the order dated. 17.08.2021 the petitioner claims to have submitted detailed representation and thereafter 4th and 5th respondent raised certain objections regarding the appointment of the writ petitioner which even in fact on the notice the petitioner and the 4th and 5th respondent committee of management submitted there version and thereafter appointment of writ petitioner was held to be valid he was made entitled for increments etc. vide order dated 8.9.2021 by the District Inspector of schools Mainpuri. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the said order attained finality despite notice upon the 4th and 5th respondent and further since the said order was not put to compliance so contempt petition bearing number Contempt petition (Civil No. 4900 of 2021) was instituted by the writ petitioner in which on 16.11.2021 an order was passed by the District inspector of schools whereby compliance of the order was made. In para 32 it is also stated since the benefits
were not extended at the ends of respondent nos. 4 and 5 institution so the District inspector of Schools, Mainpuri, second respondent proceeded to initiate proceedings for single operation consequent thereof the salary of the petitioner for the months of December 2021 till March 2022 has been paid to the petitioner with increments however arrears of salary being difference of salary paid to the petitioner and the salary which she is entitled to as per order dated 16.11.2021 was not extended and thereafer the writ petitioner claims to have retired on 31.3.2022. It is further stand of the writ petitioner that on one pretext or the other her genuine demand was not being acceded to thus the writ petitioner kept on representing the matter.
" It is a case where an Assistant Teacher of a recognized aided Institution has retired and prior to her retirement, she had a long drawn legal battle before this Court which ultimately compelled her to file a contempt application.
It appears that in order to avoid any adverse action in the contempt proceedings, Sri Manoj Kumar Verma, the District Inspector of Schools taking the petitioner lawfully entitled to all increments and dues passed an order of entitlement on 08.09.2021 and then vide order dated 16.11.2021 cleared payment of salary by granting necessary increments from November 2021 to March 2022 and she continued to receive pay till March 2022 when ultimately she attained the age of superannuation on 31.03.2022 and now when she
demanded pension, it appears in the absolute connivance with the Management of the Institution, the District Inspector of School came to pass an order on 06.10.2022 holding her appointment to be invalid.
This is a clear case where an administrative officer in the rank of District Inspector of Schools has sought to review his order which was beyond the scope of his authority. It all shows smell of malice both in law and facts.
Let the District Inspector of Schools explain his position by filing personal affidavit in this Court as to under what circumstances, he has withheld the payment of pension of the petitioner since last one year. An appropriate affidavit of compliance be filed, failing which the District Inspector of Schools Sri Manoj Kumar Verma will be appearing in person before this Court on the next date fixed.
List on 17.04.2023 peremptorily on the top of the board. "
Order dated 23.05.2015:
"A personal affidavit of Manoj Kumar Verma, in compliance of the earlier order of this Court dated 16th May, 2023 filed today is taken on record.
The petitioner is permitted to implead Deputy Director of Education as one of the respondents in the present petition forthwith.
The District Inspector of School has annexed an order dated 22th May, 2023 whereby he has withdrawn the order dated 21st September, 2022 and modified order dated 6th October, 2022 and has further reiterated the recommendation made on 18th May, 2023 to the Deputy
Director of Education for according approval to the claim of pension to the petitioner so that the petitioner may be paid pension.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that officer concerned shall take decision in the matter and shall be filing compliance affidavit within the next one weeks' time
In view of the recommendations so made by the District Inspector of Schools in his letter dated 22nd May, 2023, the personal appearance of District Inspector of Schools is hereby dispensed with until further orders of this Court. Notices issued to him shall also stand discharged.
The petition is posted on 30th May, 2023 at 2:00 pm only to ensure that payment of pension is cleared by the concerned Deputy Director of Education and is paid to the petitioner. The arrears of increament of the petitioner shall also be paid to the petitioner accordingly.
Deputy Director of Education will be filing affidavit of compliance in the matter, failing which, he shall appear in person on the next date fixed. "
Order dated 30.05.2023:
"Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri V.C.Saxena, learned Standing Counsel.
Dr. Mukesh Chandra, presently holding the position of Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Agra Region, Agra is present in Court. He states that there is no difficulty in clearing the pensionary benefits to the petitioner under old pension scheme except that GPF contribution for which petitioner was required to make an undertaking before the authority that whatever was contribution to be deposited at his end under the GPF head may be calculated and deducted at the time of finalizing pension.
A copy of the letter of undertaking given by the petitioner dated 25th May, 2023 has been placed before the court, and the same is taken on record. Even though, Dr. Mukesh Chandra undertakes to accomplish the task under his personal supervision within next two weeks' time and will ensure that pensionary benefits are released to the petitioner
in any case by 20th June, 2023 and this undertaking recorded by the Court, it is hereby provided that violation thereof will result in holding him liable for contempt. It is expected that after the pensionary benefits are awarded to the petitioner as per undertaking, a compliance affidavit thereof in that respect shall also be filed before this court by the next date fixed.
In view of above, Court is taking lenient view in the matter and accordingly exempting the Deputy Director from personal appearance on future dates subject to his filing compliance affidavit by the next date fixed.
List this matter on the top of the board again on 4th July, 2023. "
proposing to decide the mater, considering the pleadings set forth in present petition as well as the stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties while directing respondent no.7, Director of Education (Madhyamik) U.P., Prayagraj to consider the claim of the writ petitioner in the light of the averments made in the para 9 of the compliance affidavit dated 3.7.2023 filed by Associate District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri with regard to the fact that on 28.06.2023 pension of the writ petitioner has been sanctioned, encashment amount of Rs. 7,32,747/- has also been sanctioned but on account of non sanctioning of budget, the payment is not being accorded. So far as issue with regard to payment of increments which according to the writ petitioner remains to be paid (though disputed by the learned Standing Counsel) seventh respondent shall ensure that the payment, if any, legally due be paid shall be paid expeditiously. Aforesaid exercise shall be given effect to within six weeks from the date of production of certified copy by either of the parties.
Order Date :- 11.7.2023/Vipul
Digitally signed by :- VIPUL PRATAP GOGAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to arrears of salary and pension.
Whether the Director of Education must ensure payment of legally due increments.
Smt. Sheelwati
State Of U.P.
District Inspector of Schools Mainpuri
Maharani Laxmi Bai Balika Intermediate College
Director Secondary Education UP Prayagraj
Deputy Director of Education Agra Region
Vikas Budhwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
