AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Viju Abraham, J
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Exts.P3 and P6. By Ext.P3, leave without allowance was granted for the period from 17.07.2003 to 31.05.2004 under Rule 91 of Part I KSR with a rider that the leave period will not count for any service benefits including pension. It is the said rider in Ext.P3 order, that is essentially challenged in this writ petition.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount due to the petitioner is not disbursed in the light of Ext.P6 letter issued by the Director or Public Instructions which shows that though similarly situated teachers have approached this Court and were granted relief, the benefit cannot be granted as the Department is proposing to file appeal against the said judgments, before the Hon'ble Apex Court.
The petitioner's specific case that based on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in judgment dated 14.01.2009 in W.A.Nos.2734/2007 and 1935/2008, the benefits have been granted to similarly situated persons. The contention taken by the Government in this writ petition is that the amount is not disbursed to the petitioner as the department proposes to file appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court challenging the judgment of the Division Bench. This Court as per order dated 04.04.2012 directed disbursal of all the benefits to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner shall file an undertaking that in the event of the SLPs being allowed, the entire amount will be refunded.
It has been brought to my notice that SLP Nos.21778 to 21781/2009 challenging the judgment of the Division Bench has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court as per order dated 08.07.2013. It is submitted that all the amounts due to the petitioner has been disbursed pursuant to the interim order passed.
In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the above writ petition is disposed of making the interim order absolute.