Allahabad High Court
Narsingh Pandey And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 29 January, 2021
Bench: Salil Kumar Rai
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14476 of 2020
Petitioner :- Narsingh Pandey And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Verma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
By means of the writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 22.10.2020 whereby his claim for payment of pensionary benefits computing his qualifying service from the date of initial appointment has been rejected in view of the Government order dated 20.01.2004. The validity/applicability of the Government order was subject matter of consideration of this Court in Writ petition No. 28679 of 2009 regarding the Assistant Teacher in the Primary Section of Education Institute represented by the respective Committee of Management. This Court has allowed the Writ petition and has held as follows:-
"Accordingly and in view of the above, this writ petition is allowed and it is accordingly held that the petitioners shall be entitled to pension under the provisions of the Rules 1964. The management contribution required to be deposited may be so made within a period of two months and thereafter the respondents shall proceed to compute the pension of the petitioners taking into account the total length of qualifying service rendered by them and in the light of the observations made herein above. The pension so computed and becoming liable to be paid to the petitioners from their respective dates of superannuation will be paid within a period of two months from the date of deposit of management contribution and the arrears shall carry interest of 12 per cent per annum.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed in terms indicated above."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is covered by the decision of this Court in Writ petition No. 28679 of 2009 dated 29.01.2015. It has also been stated that the order of this Court passed in Writ-A No. 28679 of 2009 has also been followed in Writ-A No. 40837 of 2015 vide order dated 5.8.2015 (annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition).
It has been stated in the instructions received by the Standing Counsel that the Special Leave Petition has been filed against the judgement of this Court in Writ-A No. 28679 of 2009. The said fact has also been stated in the order dated 22.10.2020. However, there is nothing on record to indicate that the order of this Court passed in Writ-A No. 28679 of 2009 has been stayed by the Supreme Court.
In this view the Writ petition deserves to be allowed in the terms of the judgment and order dated 29.01.2015 passed in Writ Petition No. 28679 of 2009 (Sri Krishna Prasad Yadav & Others Vs. State of U.P.).
The petitioner is held entitled to pension under the provision of the Rule 1964. The managerial contribution required to be deposited may be so made within a period of two months and thereafter, the respondents shall proceed to compute the pension of the petitioners taking into account the total length of qualifying service rendered by him and in the light of the observations made by this Court in Writ petition No. 28679 of 2009. The pension so computed be paid to the petitioner from his respective date of superannuation within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the Managerial contribution and the arrears shall carry interest of 8% per annum.
Impugned order dated 22.10.2020 is hereby quashed.
The writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 29.1.2021
Anurag/-
