AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
The petitioners are legal heirs of late Shri Prem Chand Sharma, who retired as Superintendent from the respondent-Board on 31.7.2007. The grievance of the petitioners is that the death-cum-retirement gratuity due to late Shri P.C. Sharma has not been released by the respondents. The substantive relief prayed in the instant petition is as under:
"(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay/release the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity proportionately in favour of the petitioners alongwith statutory interest from the due date till the actual date of payment, within a period of one month."
According to the respondents, after the death of Shri P.C. Sharma, family pension was sanctioned in favour of his wife Smt. Malti Devi and after her death, the family pension has been sanctioned in favour of the couple's son Dixit w.e.f. 19. 3.2015. The respondents have submitted that Shri P.C. Sharma was not entitled for gratuity. He was convicted by the court of learned Special Judge, Shimla for the offences under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The said case arose out of the fact that Shri P.C. Sharma had claimed and received a sum of Rs. 24,696/- from the respondents towards Leave Travel Concession. However, he never undertook the claimed journey. The learned trial court vide judgment dated 27.11.2000 convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-.
Shri P.C. Sharma assailed his conviction by way of Criminal Appeal No. 722 of 2002. He died during pendency of the criminal appeal. His wife-Smt. Malti Devi was brought on record as appellant. She withdrew the criminal appeal on 30.3.2010 with prayer that she be allowed to apply to the respondent-Board for taking sympathetic view regarding release of retiral benefits of Shri P.C. Sharma. Smt. Malti Devi also died.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Board submitted that representation was made by petitioner No. 1, who is son of the deceased couple Shri P.C. Sharma and Smt. Malti Devi, to the respondent-Board praying for release of retiral benefits due to Shri P.C. Sharma. The said representation was considered by the Board of Directors of the respondents and was rejected. The decision so arrived at by the Board has been placed on record as Annexure R-1, dated 12.11.2002.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that one Shri Roshan Lal Justa, working as Senior Assistant with the respondent-Board was similarly situated as Shri P.C. Sharma. He was also facing allegations of having received LTC amount without undertaking the journey. Said Shri R.L. Justa was also convicted by the learned trial Court. He did not challenge his conviction, rather he served the sentence imposed upon him. His representation for release of retiral benefits was favourably considered by the Executive Director (Personnel) of the respondent-Board inasmuch as an office order was passed on 31. 10.2012, whereby only 1/4th of basic pension of Shri Roshan Lal Justa was ordered to be withheld for a period of six months and that too without cumulative effect. Retiral benefits were not withheld from him. Gratuity was also released in his favour. Whereas in the case of Shri P.C. Sharma, though family pension has been sanctioned in favour of Mr. Dixit (son of Shri P.C. Sharma), but entire DCRG has been withheld. These facts have not been disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. In fact, learned counsel for the respondents has very fairly placed on record copy of the office order dated 31.10.2012.
The representation preferred by petitioner No. 1 in respect of release of Gratuity due to his late father has been dismissed by the respondents without passing any speaking order. Prima-facie, it appears that Shri Roshan Lal Justa and Shri P.C. Sharma were situated almost similarly but their cases for release of retiral benefits were dealt with differently. Having heard learned counsel for parties and on going through the documents, present appears to be a fit case where in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience, respondents should be directed to examine afresh the grievances raised in the present petition. Accordingly, the respondent-Board is directed to consider the entire matter regarding release of Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity due to late Shri P.C. Sharma afresh and pass appropriate order thereupon in accordance with law, keeping in view the above observations within a period of four weeks. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any.