Allahabad High Court
Durga Bux Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru.Addl.Chief ... on 3 February, 2021
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 3070 of 2021
Petitioner :- Durga Bux Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru.Addl.Chief Secy. Transport & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 6.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 27.10.2005 passed by respondent No.3 whereby punishment was awarded to him in a disciplinary proceeding with a prayer to issue writ of mandamus to ensure payment of complete post retiral benefits to him.
3. In regard to delay occasioned in challenging the order of year 2005, a query was made to learned counsel for the petitioner that in which paragraph, he has explained the delay occasioned, he invited attention of this court on paragraph-21 of the writ petition and in support thereof, he placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Devi Vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others; 2020 (38) LCD 1 and on the said basis he submitted that retiral dues cannot be withheld on the ground of latches, as it is source of livelihood and fundamental right of the petitioner.
4. He further submitted that the petitioner is a Class-8th pass and is not aware about legal position, therefore, he could not approach this court within the time prescribed under the relevant provisions. He submitted that in regard to the grievances, he has already represented his claim before respondent No.2 vide application dated 30.12.2020, which is lying pending consideration and in case direction is issued for consideration of the same, ends of justice would be met.
5. On the other hand, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 6 submitted that the petitioner has been paid gratuity amounting to Rs.347760/-, GIS amounting to Rs.9697/-, P.F. amounting to Rs.572574/- and Ist and IInd ACP w.e.f. 16.08.2012 and 16.08.2018, respectively and on the said basis, he submitted that there is no dues lying pending in respect of the petitioner, therefore, the claim setup in the writ petition is misconceived.
6. He further submitted the delay occasioned in challenging the order of punishment of year 2005 has not been explained properly. He also tried to distinguish the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Learned standing counsel also followed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 6.
8. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record as well as the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner.
9. On perusal, it is evident that against the petitioner a disciplinary proceeding was initiated and he was dismissed from service on 25.04.2004. The order of dismissal was challenged in departmental appeal, which was allowed and a fresh order was passed, whereby certain benefit was withheld in the order passed in appeal on 27.10.2005. The petitioner continued in service and no challenge was made to order dated 27.10.2005. On attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 31.07.2019 and most of the post retiral dues have been paid to the petitioner.
10. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of impugned order dated 27.10.2005, a liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive representation enclosing all documents ventilating his grievances before respondent No.2 within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is filed within aforesaid period, the same shall be considered and appropriate reasoned and speaking order shall be passed in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
11. With the aforesaid objection and direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 3.2.2021
Adarsh K Singh
