Raj Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.7353 of 2023 Date of Decision: 2.7.2025

¶3

Sh. Raj Kumar

¶4

……...Petitioner Versus …....Respondents

¶5

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

¶6

Coram

¶7

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Gupta and Ms. Babita Chauhan, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.5. ___________________________________________________________________________

¶8

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶9

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

¶10

following reliefs:

¶11

“i. That the respondents may be ordered to release the retiral dues of the petitioner such as pension, leave encashment, gratuity and ex-gratia etc. with immediate effect with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.”

¶12

2. Reply on behalf of respondent No.5 is on record, perusal whereof reveals that after having received Pension Papers, respondents authorized the pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner vide PPO No. 1124313404 dated 22.6.2024 amounting to Rs. 19350/-. Though

¶13

2 -

¶14

reply on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 has not been filed, but during the proceedings of the case, learned Deputy Advocate General, has made available communication dated 29.11.2024 issued under the signature of Executive Engineer, Ghumarwin Division, HPPWD Ghumarwin, which reads as under:

¶15

“I have the honor to invite your kind attention towards subject cited above matter, which was listed in the Hon'ble High Court of H.P. on 16-10-2024, when the Hon'ble court was pleased to pass the following orders:-

¶16

As per report of Registry, the reply filed by the respondent No. 5 only, Rejoinder to the reply filed by respondent No.5 as prayed for, be filed within four weeks. List therafter. In the meanwhile, reply by remaining respondents be also filed"

¶17

In this behalf, it is submitted that the petitioner in the present petition has claimed release of retiral dues like Pension, Gratuity and Leave encashment etc. The petitioner stood retired from the Govt. Service on 31-03-2023 on attaining the age of his superannuation. The petitioner has rendered sixteen years service. As such the respondents have processed the pension case of the petitioner to the A.G.H.P. vide letter dated 08-42024 and the Accountant General Himachal Pradesh Shimla has sanctioned pension in favour of petitioner vide letter dated 21-06-2024. Now the petitioner is drawing Rs. 19350/- only per month Pension. It is further submitted that the respondents have released the other retiral dues to the petitioner i.e. Death Cum retirement gratuity Rs. 427829/- only during 7/2024 and the leave encashment amount has been sanctioned vide this office letter 6802-05 dated 22-11-2024 for Rs. 439573/-only and the same is likely to be credited in the account of petitioner shortly.

¶18

3 -

¶19

In view of above, the present petition has become infructuous and the same deserves to be dismissed.

¶20

It is, therefore, requested that the Hon’ble Court may please be apprised accordingly and pray for disposal of petition in the interest of justice. The copy of P.P.O. and Sanctioned order of Gratuity are enclosed herewith. D.A. as above.”

¶21

3. It is quite apparent from afore communication that retiral dues like Pension, Gratuity and Leave encashment etc, in favour of the petitioner, who retired from government service from 31.3.2023 after rendering six years service already stand released. Respondent-State forwarded the pension case of the petitioner to respondent No.5 vide letter dated 8.4.2024, which further sanctioned pension in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 21.6.2024, as a result thereof, petitioner is in receipt of pension to the tune of Rs. 19350/- per month. Retiral dues i.e. Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) to the tune of Rs. 427829/- and Leave Encashment to the tune of Rs.439573/- also stand sanctioned in favour of the petitioner.

¶22

4. Learned Deputy Advocate General states that though he has reason to presume and believe that by now, aforesaid amount on account of DCRG and leave encashment must have been credited in the bank account of the petitioner, but if not, same shall be paid expeditiously.

¶23

5. Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings, accordingly, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents-State to ensure that

¶24

4 -

¶25

amount, if any, due to the petitioner on account of DCRG and leave encashment, as detailed in the afore communication, if not already released, is positively released/credited in the bank account of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within three months, failing which respondents would be liable to pay interest @ 6% from the date afore amount fell due in favour of the petitioner.

¶26

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶27

July 2, 2025 (manjit)

¶28

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

Raj Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Om Parkash Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Another

Rakesh Chand Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Another

Padam Singh Vs Mc Shimla