Allahabad High Court
Smt. Sushma Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 22 September, 2023
Bench: Vikas Budhwar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:183896
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15907 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Sushma Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Krishna Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Ram Krishna Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for respondents 1 to 4.
In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to the fifth respondent.
The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in attached Primary Section of Kamlapati Tripathi, Boys Inter College, Cantt. Varanasi on 6.8.1991 and he was paid salary w.e.f. May, 2003, however the institution came grant in aid on 1.10.1989 and he after completion of 32 years of service superannated on 31.3.2023. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the deduction of C.P.F./G.P.F. has not been made from October, 1989 though the institution came in grant in aid of the State Government on 1.10.1989.
As per the writ petitioner he on his date of retirement was getting his salary of Rs.60,400/- thus he is entitled to pension of amount Rs.30,200/- but he has been paid pension to the amount of Rs.24,160/-. He seeks to rely upon a judgment in the case of Civil Misc. Writ Petition (Writ-A) No.17819 of 2007 (Mangali Prasad Verma vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 20.12.2022.
Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents to accord consideration to the claim of the writ petitioner to grant full pension in that regard.
Sri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, learned Standing Counsel who appears for the respondents no. 1 to 4 on the other hand submits that the issue as to whether the judgement in the case of Mangali Prasad Verma (Supra) is applicable and the fact as to whether the writ petitioner was getting pension Rs.60,400/- or he is entitled to the said benefit needs determination at the first instance by the second respondent, Director of Education (Secondary), Shiksha Nideshalaya Pension Anubhag-2, U.p. at Allahabad who shall address to the claim of the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner espouse his cause before the second respondent.
Learned Standing Counsel further submits that he does not propose to file any response to the writ petition.
To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same.
Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off without seeking any response from the respondents granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self-attested copy of the writ petition before the second respondent, Director of Education (Secondary), Shiksha Nideshalaya Pension Anubhag-2, U.P. at Allahabad, who shall on the receipt of the same, put to notice to the fifth respondent and proceed to decide the entitlement of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law as per the relevant statutes and the government order and the policy in vogue and the law propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order.
Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off.
Order Date :- 22.9.2023
piyush
