Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/1484/2021 on 24 November, 2021
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
SL. No Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPSS No.1484 of 2021
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. K.K. Harbola, Advocate, for the
petitioner.
Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Additional CSC,
for the State of Uttarakhand/1.
Mr. Bhupendra Singh Bisht, Advocate,
for the respondent No.2.
The grievance which had been raised by
the petitioner in the present writ petition is that
despite of having attained the age of
superannuation as back as on 30.06.2009, he
has not been paid with the arrears of pension,
dearness allowance and leave encashment,
which he was otherwise entitled to receive, in
accordance with law. Despite of the fact, that
some of the amount so far it relates to the
arrears of salary, arrears of pension and
dearness allowance, as a consequence of the
implications of the recommendations of the 6th
and 7th Pay Commission are concerned, despite
of its requisite sanction having been granted by
the Competent Authority, the said amount has
still not been remitted, which has been
determined by the petitioner payable to him to
the tune of Rs.2,55,212/-.
As far as this amount is concerned, since
it is not in dispute, that it has already been
sanctioned, and the petitioner was entitled to
receive the same, and considering the age of the
petitioner also, the writ petition would stand
disposed of directing the respondents to pay the
sanction amount of arrears of salary, and the
pensionary benefits, as a consequence of the
implications of the recommendations of the 6th
and 7th Pay Commission, as sanctioned by the
respondents to the tune of Rs.2,55,212/-, within
a period of one month from the date of the
production of the certified copy of this
judgment.
So far as the claim of the petitioner is
concerned, for the payment of the leave
encashment benefits, admittedly this part is not
admitted by the respondents so far, and the
logic for not sanctioning the said amount
payable towards leave encashment is
concerned, which has been assigned by the
respondents, it is based on the ground, that
since the petitioner has not applied for the
payment of the leave encashment, the same has
not yet been processed or considered by the
respondents.
On the contrary, it has been argued by
the learned counsel for the petitioner, that now
he has already applied before the respondents
for the sanction of the leave encashment, and
the said application is pending consideration,
and no decision has been taken on the same.
Since the retiral benefits being a
property, which falls to be within the ambit of
Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, as
far as the petitioner's entitlement for the leave
encashment is concerned, the writ petition is
being disposed of with the direction to the
respondent No.2, to consider and pass
appropriate orders for sanctioning the leave
encashment, as applied by the petitioner, and in
case, if he is held to be entitled to receive the
same as per law, the same would be ensured to
be remitted within a period of one month from
the date of the decision to the taken by the
respondents.
Subject to the above observations, the
writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
24.11.2021
NR/
