Shashi Kiran Angiras And Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Anr

Sandeep Sharma, J

Having perused reply filed by the respondents in the above captioned execution petitions, this Court finds that, save and except revised gratuity, all other benefits in terms of judgment sought to be executed stand released. Though there is no specific denial, if any, on the part of the department that petitioners herein are entitled to gratuity in terms of mandate contained in the judgment, but same is being delayed on the pretext that petitioners’ case for the revised gratuity has been sent to the office of Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh.

Having taken note of the para-4 of the reply, which is extracted herein below, this Court finds that there is a substantial compliance on the part of the respondents. Pay arrears already stand released to the petitioners in one installment as per old pay scale, whereas as per notification dated 17.9.2022, arrears have been proposed to be released in installments. Para 4 of the afore reply reads as under:

“That pay fixation of the petitioners have been made in compliance to the Hon'ble High Court common judgment dated 30.06.2022 in LPA No. 135/2012 titled as State of H.P. & ors. Vs Prem Lata Thaper. Accordingly, the following benefits have been released to the petitioners:

i) Smt. Shashi Kiran Angiras:

a) Pay arrear Rs.12,68,416/-

b) Revised Scale arrears-Retd. 31.08.2015 on 31.08.2015 (thus not payable),

c) Revised Leave Encashment- Bill of Rs. 1,71,490/- has been submitted to the treasury.

d) Revised gratuity- Case has been sent to AGHP.

ii) Dr. Manju Kaushal:

a) Pay arrear - Rs. 29,82,085/-

b) Revised Scale arrears- 50,000/-

(1st installment of revised pay arrear as per Govt. Notification No. Fin-(PR)B(7)-1/2021-loose dated 17th September, 2022, has been released)

c) Revised Leave Encashment- Rs. 5, 22,737/-

d) Revised gratuity- Case has been sent to AGHP.

iii) Sh. Shiv Bhardwaj:

a) Pay arrear - 10,16,374/-

b) Revised Scale arrear-Retd. on 31.03.2015.

c)Revised Leave Encashment- Bill amounting to Rs. 3,11,279/- has been submitted to the treasury.

d) Revised Gratuity - Case has been sent to AGHP.

iv) Sh. Ashwani Nayital :

a) Pay Arrear-1200871/-

b) Revised Scale Arrear- Retired 30.04.2015

c) Revised Leave Encashment - 1,68,767/-

d) Revised gratuity - Case has been sent to AGHP.

As such, it is evident from the aforesaid detail that pay arrears have been paid to all the petitioners in one installment as per old pay scale, whereas as per Govt. Notification No. Fin-(PR)B(7)-1/2021-loose dated 17th September, 2022, 1st installment of revised pay scale arrears amounting to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousands) only has also been released to the petitioner No. 2 because petitioner No. 2 retired on 31.07.2018 i.e. after the revision of pay scale. Retirement Gratuity has been paid to them at the time of their retirement and cases of revised gratuity have been submitted by the Principals of concerned colleges to the A.G.H.P. Revised Leave encashment has also been released to all petitioners. As such, the respondent state has not denied any benefit as allowed by this Hon’ble High Court to the petitioners.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that once arrears are being released pursuant to directions issued by the court, respondents, of their own, could not have decided to release the arrears in installments.

There appears to be merit in the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that once there is a direction issued by the competent court of law to release arrears in favour of the petitioners, respondents could not have ordered to release the same in installments on the strength of notification dated 17.9.2022, rather ought to have released the same in one go.

It is not in dispute that respondents by way of aforesaid notification have decided to release the arrears in installments, but it is also not in dispute that it has been conveyed to all the departments that amount, on the basis of court orders, if any, is to be released, in one go, not in installments.

Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and as such, same are closed with direction to the respondents to ensure release of gratuity within six weeks that too in one go, failing which petitioners would be at liberty to get the present petitions revived enabling this court to order for attachment of the property of the department as well as salary of the erring officials.