Allowed

Sh.Narain Sharma v. R v v N Ltd, Jaipur

Rajasthan HC13 Jan 2014CW/418/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a writ petition where an employee was denied pensionary benefits due to a missed notice deadline. Citing a similar precedent, the court directed the respondents to accept a belated option and pay arrears of pension. This case was disposed of in a short order based on settled principles from a sister bench.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to accept petitioner's option for pensionary benefits and pay arrears of pension. Exercise to be completed within two months.

Sh.Narain Sharma Vs R v v N Ltd, Jaipur — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.418/2007

¶4

Shri Narain Sharma

¶5

Versus

¶6

Chairman, Rajasthan Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 13/01/2014 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

¶7

Ms. Rashmi Jain for Mr. Ravi Shankar Sharma, for petitioner Mr. Aladden Khan, for respondents

¶8

¶9

The petitioner is aggrieved by denial of pensionary benefits even after giving option as called by the respondents. The denial of pensionary benefits is precisely for want of option within time given by the respondents.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that employees were invited to give their option for pensionary benefits through a notice dated 06.01.1999 published in the newspaper. The petitioner is a resident of small village of Khinch Achrol and at the relevant time when notice was flashed in the newspaper, he was in the said village thus could not get information for the option in absence of circulation of the newspaper in the said village. The petitioner went in the office of the respondents for his personal work where he got information regarding notice dated 06.01.1999. He immediately submitted his option on 31^st October, 2000. The respondents firstly refused to accept the

¶11

¶12

oiption as it was beyond period of 60 days from the date of notice dated 06.01.1999. It is stated that similar writ petition has already been allowed followed by dismissal of the special appeal so as leave to appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

¶13

I have considered the submission made by learned counsel for petitioner and find that controversy in regard to same issue was decided by this court in the case of Kanta Prasad Dubey Vs. The Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Vitran Nigam & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.102/2001 on 13.09.2002. The special appeal bearing No.176/2003 was dismissed vide order dated 14.02.2003. The SLP against the said order was also dismissed.

¶14

In view of the above and keeping in mind the facts narrated by the petitioner, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to accept the option submitted by the petitioner for pensionary benefits and extend him due benefits. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to pay arrears of pension after deducting amount of GPF so paid to the petitioner at the time of retirement. The required exercise may be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶15

[M.N.BHANDARI], J.

¶16

FRBOHRA/418CWP2007.doc

¶17

Certificate:

¶18

¶19

“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”

¶20

FATEH RAJ BOHRA, SR.P.A.

Sh.Narain Sharma v. R v v N Ltd, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh.Narain Sharma v. R v v N Ltd, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jugal Kishore Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Sumer Chand Jain Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Govind Purohit Vs Bank of Inida and Ors.

Radheya Shyam Mittal Vs Uco Bank Kolkatta and Ors.

Dr D N Sharma Vs Khetri Vikas Samiti and Ors.

Narain Lal Gupta Vs State of Raj and Ors.