Chattisgarh High Court
Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla ... vs Dr. Vyas Narayan Dubey on 12 April, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No. 290 of 2020
Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla University, Through Its, Registrar, Pt.
Ravi Shankar Shukla University, Amanaka, G.E. Road, Police Station
Sarswati Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Pin 492001
---- Appellant
Versus
Dr. Vyas Narayan Dubey, S/o Late Shri Manrakhan Lal Dubey, Aged
About 66 Years Retired Professor Literature And Linguistic, Pt. Ravi
Shankar Shukla University Raipur, Chhattisgarh, R/o - B-2/5, Manas
Kunj, Lokmanya Society, Rohinipuram, Raipur, Tahsil And District
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)
For Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kumar Dube, Advocate
Hon'ble Mr. Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Gautam Chourdiya, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
12/04/2022
Heard Mr. Neeraj Choubey, learned counsel, appearing for the
appellant. Also heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Dube, learned counsel,
appearing for the respondent.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.01.2019
passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(S) No. 625/2019 as well as
order dated 11.04.2019 passed in Review Petition No. 69/2019.
3. The writ petition was filed praying for the following reliefs:
"10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of
the petitioner for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.
10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to direct the respondents to release the 100%
monthly pension @ 34,540/- from the date of
retirement and the difference amount between
34,540/- and 34,001/- from 01.05.2018 till actual
disbursement of 100% of pension.
10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to direct the respondents to release the other
benefits as group Insurance, leave encashment,
GPF and the amount of gratuity also be calculated
and disburse to the petitioner with interest for
delayed payment.
10.4 Cost of the proceedings kindly be awarded.
10.5 Any other relief, which may be deemed, fit by
this Hon'ble Court just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case may also be provided in
favour of the petitioner."
4. The petitioner retired from service as a Professor of Pandit
Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur on 30.04.2018.
5. The grievance expressed in this appeal is that the writ petition
was disposed of by the learned Single Judge without issuing any notice
to the appellant and as such, the appellant was denied opportunity of
placing its case before the learned Single Judge.
6. Mr. Choubey submits that because of the fact that no notice was
issued to the appellant, a review petition was filed before the learned
Single Judge, but the same was also dismissed by order dated
11.04.2019.
7. A perusal of the order passed in the review petition goes to
show that submission was advanced by the learned counsel for the
review petitioner that an amount of Rs. 22,22,446/- against the writ
petitioner was remaining outstanding.
8. Mr. Dube has submitted that the petitioner was exonerated in a
departmental proceeding and there is no outstanding dues payable by
the petitioner.
9. Mr. Choubey submits that pension at the rate of 90% is being
paid to the petitioner and leave encashment dues have also been paid.
However, because of the aforesaid disputed amount, payment of
provident fund and gratuity could not be made.
10. Mr. Dube does not dispute that the writ petition came to be
disposed of without issuing notice to the appellant-University.
11. In the case of Johra & Others v. State of Haryana, reported in
(2019) 2 SCC 324, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that no order can be
passed without hearing a party to the proceedings as it would be against
the principles of natural justice.
12. In that view of the matter, we set aside the order of the learned
Single Judge and remand the matter for fresh consideration. Bearing in
mind that the writ petitioner had retired almost four years back, an early
resolution is called for. The appellant-University is granted time till 2 nd of
May, 2022 to file its response in the writ petition. It is made clear that if no
response is filed within the aforesaid date, the University will lose the
right of filing its response.
13. The writ petitioner, if so advised, may file his rejoinder to the
reply-affidavit, on or before 13th of May, 2022.
14. As from 14th of May, 2022, Summer Vacation starts, Registry will
list this case before the learned Single Judge on 21 st of June, 2022 for
admission. The learned Single Judge is requested to dispose of the writ
petition at the earliest.
15. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ appeal
stands disposed of.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Gautam Chourdiya)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Amit
