Naresh Kumar Sood vs State of H.P. and Others

Justice V.K. Ahuja, J.—The petitioner filed an application u/s 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following reliefs:-

(1) To grant the benefit of service of the applicant for the period from 2.11.1972 to 1.11.1974 for fixation of his pension etc.

(2) To fix the pension of the applicant on the basis of basic pay of Rs. 8,650/- which the applicant was drawing at the time of his retirement Annexure P/3.

(3) To include the Dearness Pay of Rs. 4,325/- which the applicant was drawing at the time of his retirement for the purpose of fixation of his pension Annexure P/3.

(4) To calculate the amount of gratuity payable to the applicant on the basis of basic pay of Rs. 8,650/- and dearness pay of Rs. 4,325/- which the applicant was drawing at the time of his retirement.

(5) To calculate the amount of leave encashment payable to the applicant on the basis of basic pay of Rs. 8,650/- and dearness pay of Rs. 4,325/- which the applicant was drawing at the time of his retirement.

(6) To refund the amount of Rs. 59,280/- which the respondents have deducted from the leave encashment payable to the applicant on account of the alleged excess payment of salary to him during the period of his service at the Corporation.

(7) To pay interest to the applicant @ 18% per annum on the amounts due as above.

(8) To produce the relevant record of the case for kind perusal of this Hon''ble Tribunal.

The petitioner challenged the order of Director (Urban Development), Government of Himachal Pradesh reducing his basic pay from Rs. 8,650/- to Rs. 8,375/-. The petition on abolition of the State Administrative Tribunal, was transferred to this Court and registered in this High Court as CWP (T) No. 14282 of 2008.

In reply filed by the respondents, they have taken the plea that the re-fixation was done on the basis of average basic pay for 10 months as well as his wrong fixation of pay on various occasions which necessasitated the re-fixation of the pay. The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner are that for re-fixing the pay he was not given an opportunity by the respondents to make submissions and as such, he has prayed that he should be given an opportunity to make his submissions before the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of the reduction in his basic pay, the respondents have also deducted a sum of Rs. 59,280/- from the amounts payable to the petitioner. All these questions are to be considered once the pay is re-fixed by the respondents for which an opportunity is being given to the petitioner to make his submission before the respondents.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be given notice about the reduction of the basic pay within a period of four weeks from today and after receiving reply from the respondents, the case of the petitioner shall be decided afresh accordingly within three months from the date of reply submitted by the respondents.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of so also the pending application(s), if any.