Disposed

Smt Gyatri Singhal v. State Education Department Ors.

Rajasthan HC29 Aug 2024CW/3024/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired Senior Teacher sought interest on retiral dues withheld after her retirement order wrongly recorded a pending departmental enquiry. The court found no enquiry or criminal case was pending and the error had been rectified. It directed payment of dues with 9% per annum interest on delayed amounts.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to pay retiral dues with interest @ 9% p.a. on delayed amounts within three months.

Smt Gyatri Singhal Vs State Education… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:36284]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3024/2018

¶4

Smt. Gyatri Singhal W/o Shri Suresh Chand Singhal, Resident of Pratap Vihar Colony, Dhoolkot, Dholpur, Tehsil and District Dholpur Rajasthan

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶9

The Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Bharatpur Division, Bharatpur

¶10

District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Dholpur

¶11

Smt. Sushma Sharma, Principal, Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Dholpur Rajasthan

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Ms. Namita Parihar-Dy.GC

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶15

Order

¶16

29/08/2024

¶17

By way of filing of this petition, the petitioner is seeking direction against the respondents for releasing her retiral dues along with interest thereon.

¶18

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner stood retired from the post of Senior Teacher on 31.10.2017, after attaining the age of superannuation. Counsel submits that at the time of retirement of the petitioner neither any Disciplinary Enquiry nor any criminal case was pending against him, but committing a

[2024:RJ-JP:36284]

[CW-3024/2018]

(2 of 3)

mischief, the Principal, Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Dholpur recorded a wrong and incorrect fact in the retirement order of the petitioner that a Departmental Enquiry is pending against the petitioner. Counsel submits that the above incorrect fact was rectified by the District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Dholpur vide letter dated 26.12.2017 indicating therein that no Departmental Enquiry was pending against the petitioner and a show cause notice was issued against the said Principal. Counsel submits that thereafter, charge-sheet was served upon the said Principal along with the order of her suspension. Counsel submits that these facts were very much in the knowledge of the respondents, but even then, his retiral dues were delayed for a considerable period of time and finally, the same were released on 25.01.2019. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to receive interest @ 9% p.a. in terms of the Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short, “the Rule, 1996”).

¶23

Per contra, learned counsel for the State-respondent opposed the prayer raised by counsel for the petitioner, but she is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that at the time of retirement of the petitioner, neither any Departmental Enquiry nor any criminal case was pending against the petitioner, but the said Principal of the school recorded a wrong and incorrect fact in the retirement order of the petitioner dated 31.10.2017 that a

[2024:RJ-JP:36284]

[CW-3024/2018]

(3 of 3)

Departmental Enquiry is pending against the petitioner and the aforesaid noting in the retirement order of the petitioner was incorrect and this fact has been rectified by the District Education Officer, Dholpur vide letter dated 26.12.2017. This fact even also came into notice of the respondents that a mischief was caused and committed by the Principal of the said school, but still the retiral dues of the petitioner were not released by the respondents without any justified reasons and the same were withheld over a considerable period of time. Hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get all her retiral dues along with interest @ 9% P.A., pending if any, over the delayed payment of retiral dues to the petitioner, in terms of Rule 89 of the Rules, 1996.

¶28

With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of.

¶29

The respondents are directed to comply with the order passed by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶30

All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶31

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶32

Aayush Sharma /126

Smt Gyatri Singhal v. State Education Department Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gyatri Singhal v. State Education Department Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Darshna D/O Shri Kaboolram Vs Rajasthan Staff Selection Board

Managing Committee, Adarsh Vidhya Mandir, (Higher Secondary Adarsh Vidhya Mandir) Vs Gulab Chand Sharma S/O Shri Battu Lal Sharma

Managing Committee Vs Smt Kalpana Patil and Anr.

Arun Sain Son of Late Shri Kishori Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Devi Singh and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Narain Prasad Sinha Vs University of Raj