AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Katju, J.—This writ petition has been filed for a certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 3.7.2002 (Annexure - 5 to the petition) and for a mandamus directing the Respondents to recompute and revise the Petitioner''s pension in accordance with G.O. dated 24.11.2001, Annexure - 4 to the writ petition holding that the Petitioner''s actual length of pensionable service is 33 years, 8 months and 11 days thus entitling him to full pension.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The Petitioner joined as lecturer in Chemistry in Gorakhpur University on 1.8.1960 and he retired on 11.4.1994 as Professor in the same Department. During his service the State Government has given option to the teachers of the University and the Petitioner opted for pension, family pension, general provident funds and service upto 60 years. True copy of the option is Annexure - 1. The Senior Finance and Accounts Officer in Higher Education Directorate, U.P. issued a letter directing the Chief Treasury Officer, Allahabad to release the Petitioners pension from Treasury, Allahabad. True copy of the letter dated 25.4.1995 is Annexure - 2. The Mukhya Lekha Adhikari, Higher Education Directorate, Allahabad vide her order dated 26.6.1996 has revised the Petitioner''s pensionary benefits holding therein that since the Petitioner has rendered total service of 33 years, 8 months and 11 days he is entitled to full pension. True copy of the letter dated 26.6.1996 is Annexure - 3.
However, on 3.7.2002 by the impugned order, Respondent No. 2 revised the Petitioner''s pension payable to him from 1.7.2001. This letter mentioned that the Petitioner rendered only 32 years of service. True copy of the letter dated 3.7.2002 is Annexure - 5. It is stated in para 13 of the writ petition that this letter was issued without giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted a representation vide Annexure - 6 but to no avail. Hence, this writ petition.
In this case on 16.1.2003, we granted two weeks to file counter - affidavit to the learned standing counsel but no counter - affidavit was filed. Thereafter on 3.2.2003, we granted two weeks further time and no more to file counter - affidavit. As yet, no counter - affidavit has been filed. Hence, we are treating the allegations in the petition to be correct. On the facts of the case, it is clear that the Petitioner has completed 33 years, 8 months and 11 days service and we cannot understand on what basis the Respondent No. 2 has mentioned that the Petitioner completed only 32 years of service. The impugned order dated 3.7.2002, Annexure - 5 has civil consequences and hence opportunity of hearing should have been given to the Petitioner but no opportunity was given to him. Hence, the impugned order is illegal. In State of Orissa v. Binapani Dei AIR 1967 SC 1269, it was held that an order having civil consequences can only be passed after giving opportunity of hearing.
By an amendment application, the Petitioner has prayed for grant of revised pension from 1.1.1996 as is being granted to Government employees in Writ Petition No. 34935 of 2001, Dr. J.P. Kulshrestha and Ors. v. State of U.P., decided on 10.5.2002.
Following the aforesaid decision, the same benefit of revision of pension will be given to the Petitioner from 1.1.1996. Arrears of revised pension will also be given to the Petitioner with 12% interest to the Petitioner within two months of production of certified copy of this order before the authority concerned.
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 3.7.2002 is quashed. The Respondents are directed to recompute the Petitioner''s pension in the light of the observation made above forthwith.