Allahabad High Court

Smt. Manju Lata Sharma vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 1 May, 2025





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71215
 
Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 49968 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Manju Lata Sharma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Jaiswal,Rajneesh Sharma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

1. Heard Shri Rajneesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 30.06.2015 passed by the 2nd respondent whereby the claim of the petitioner was rejected and held that the amount of Rs. 81,351/- has rightly been deducted from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner.

3. A similar issue came up for consideration before this Court and the same was decided by the judgment dated 29.05.2017 in Service Single No.9395 of 2017 (Rajendra Prasad Singh vs. State of U.P. and others).

4. Admittedly, facts are not in dispute but learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly relied on the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih and others (2015) 2 SCC (L & S) 33, as the 2nd respondent did not consider any factual aspect while passing the impugned order.

5. In view of the categorical judgment on a similar issue raised, the impugned order dated 30.06.2015 cannot be sustained and is quashed. The respondents shall recompute the pension of the petitioner treating the last pay drawn by the petitioner as Lecturer (Music). While doing so, the respondents shall be guided by the judgment dated 29.05.2017 in the case of Rajendra Prasad Singh (supra) as also the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih and others (2015) 2 SCC (L & S) 33. The fresh order, as directed above, shall be passed within a period of two months. The respondents shall also take into consideration the fact that the predecessor of the petitioner was being granted the benefit whereas the same has been denied to the petitioner.

6. The writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 1.5.2025