Laxmibai Wd/O Jaideo Meshram vs The Zilla-Parishad,Bhandara And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4477 Bom

                                                   1               wp400.02.odt

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                               WRIT PETITION NO. 400 OF 2002

          Laxmibai wd/o Jaideo Meshram,
          A/a - 52 years, Occ. Household work,
          R/o. Gautamnagar, Bajpai Ward,
          Near Old Borewell, Gondia,
          Tah. & Distt. Gondia            ......                             PETITIONER

                                   ...VERSUS...

 1.       The Zilla-Parishad, Bhandara,
          through its Chief Executive Officer.

 2.       The Zilla-Parishad, Gondia,
          through its Chief Executive Officer.

 3.       The Panchayat Samitee, Arjuni-Morgaon,
          Distt. Gondia through its
          Block Development Officer,

 4.       The Panchayat Samittee, Distt. Gondia,
          through its Block Development Officer ......      RESPONDENTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri R.K.Borkar, Advocate, for Petitioner.
 Mrs. M.P.Munshi, Advocate for Respondent nos. 1 to 4
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, AND
                                         Mrs. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

                           DATE    : 13     th
                                               JULY, 2017 .

 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Deshpande, J)


          1]               The   husband   of   the   petitioner   was   working   as

Gram Sewak in the Zilla Parishad, Bhandara which was

subsequently bifurcated and another Zilla Parishad, Gondia,

was established. After the bifurcation, the husband of the

2 wp400.02.odt

petitioner was allotted to the services of Zilla Parishad, Gondia,

where he worked and ultimately expired on 11.11.1999, after

rendering the qualifying service. The entitlements of the

petitioner were calculated by Zilla Parishad, Gondia, on

30.08.2000 and the gratuity payable was worked out to

Rs.1,56,600/-. The petitioner-widow was paid an amount of

Rs.90,728/- and the balance of Rs.65,872/- was withheld.

2] Thereafter, on 04.12.1999, a show cause notice

was issued in the name of the petitioner calling upon her as to

why an amount of Rs.65,872/- should not be withheld

permanently for the acts of misconduct alleged to have been

committed by her husband while in service. The show cause

notice shows the proposal to institute the prosecution under

Section 409 of Indian Penal Code read with Sections 178 and

179 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act.

3] The withholding of pension after the death of an

employee and thereafter to issue show cause notice in the

name of the petitioner, a widow of an employee, is shocking the

conscience. No such action could be sustained in the eyes of

law. Therefore, no detailed reasons are required to be

recorded to set aside the action of the respondents.

                                                    3              wp400.02.odt



           4]              In the result, we allow the petition and quash and

set aside the show cause notice dated 04.12.1999 and direct

the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs.65,872/-

payable on account of gratuity along with interest at the rate of

12% per annum from the date of the death of the husband of

the petitioner on 11.11.1999 till disbursal of this amount to the

petitioner. The respondents shall also release all other benefits

which otherwise are available to the petitioner on account of

death of her husband while in service. The respondent Zilla

Parishad, Gondia, to pay costs of Rs.5,000/- to the petitioner.

The entire payment be made within a period of

three months from the date of communication of this order,

failing which the respondent Chief Executive Officer shall

remain present on 30.10.2017.

Rule made absolute in above terms. No orders as

to cost.

Put up this matter on 30.10.2017 to see

compliance of this order.

                                JUDGE                            JUDGE

 Rvjalit