Disposed

Budhi Sagar Shukla and 12 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2024WRIA/9443/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, retired doctors, challenged the 15-year restoration period for commuted pension under a G.O. They argued recovery was illegal after 11 years. The court passed an interim order halting recovery and listed the case for counter affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Interim order passed: no recovery of commuted pension amount from petitioners until further orders; case listed for counter affidavit.

Budhi Sagar Shukla and 12 Others vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9443 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Budhi Sagar Shukla And 12 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Finance Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Agrawal,Alok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶6

By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶7

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the provisions stating restoration period of 15 years as amended by G.O. No. Sa.3-1508/10-2008-308-97 dated 08.12.2008 issued by the Finance (General) Section-3 of State of Uttar Pradesh, contained in Annexure Nos. 3 to this writ petition, after summoning the records.

¶8

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus for restoration of the commuted pension after expiry of 10 years 11 months or at best 11 years instead of 15 years as provided in the G.O. dated 08.12.2008.

¶9

(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties not to deduct the amount of commuted portion of pension from the monthly pension after the expiration of 10 years 11 months or at best 11 years during the pendency of this writ petition before this Hon'ble Court.

¶10

(d) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to refund the excess amount of money it recovered from the pension with regard to the commuted amount relating to the petitioners."

¶11

All the petitioners are retired Doctors from the Medical Department and more than 10 years period have expired since their retirement. The petitioners are aggrieved of inaction on the part of the opposite parties by deducting the amount from monthly pension for a period of 180 months (15 years) whereas the commutation amount paid at the time of retirement and the interest thereon is fully recovered in a period of 131 months (10 years and 11 months) or at best 11 years.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the manner under which the amount of recovery has been proposed is patently illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and uncalled for. The aforesaid amount is being recovered from the Doctors/

¶13

petitioners from the date of their retirement.

¶14

Learned counsel for petitioners has stated that such grievance has been noticed by the various High Courts e.g. Kerala High Court and Punjab and Haryana High Court and granted some interim protection, and as such, the petitioners filed this writ petition.

¶15

Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.6 of the writ petition which is an interim order dated 09.02.2024 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case bearing CWP No.2490 of 2024; Ram Saroop Jinda vs. State of Punjab and others. As per counsel for petitioners, the aforesaid issue is identical with the issue of the present petitioners.

¶16

Since the recovery is being executed from the retired employees since their date of retirement and as per learned counsel for the petitioners such recovery is patently illegal and arbitrary, therefore, it appears that cause of action is recurring in nature, hence, a detailed and exhaustive counter affidavit would be required from the opposite parties.

¶17

List this case on 11.11.2024.

¶18

Until further orders, no recovery shall be executed from the petitioners. It is made clear that in case the writ petiton is dismissed, the benefit granted to the petitioners by means of interim order shall be recovered in accordance with law.

¶19

In the meantime, counter affidavit may be filed.

¶20

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 16.10.2024 Ravi/

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Budhi Sagar Shukla and 12 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhi Sagar Shukla and 12 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maruf Anwar Hashmi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Affairs Sectt. Lko.

Anju vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Basic Education) Deptt. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Manoj Kumar Rai vs C.B.I. Thru. Superintendent of Police A.C.B. Lko.

Vishwa Nath Dixit and 32 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Ravi Shukla @ Guddan Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Vikas Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another