State
of Haryana & Ors Vs. D.L. Uppal [1996] INSC
102 (19 January 1996)
Ramaswamy,
K.Ramaswamy, K.Nanavati G.T. (J)
CITATION:
1996 AIR 1660 1996 SCC (2) 344 JT 1996 (2) 408 1996 SCALE (1)812
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
O R D
E R
Leave
granted;
We
have heard counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from the
order of the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court made in
C.W.P. No.8687 of 1994 on July 25, 1994.
The respondent had retired on January 31, 1994
and he claimed his pension and since his pension has not been paid, he invoked
the jurisdiction of the High Court. In the impugned order, the High Court has
directed to pay to the respondent the gratuity with 12% interest thereon within
one month from the date of judgment.
It
further directed to determine the pension of the respondent on the basis of the
emoluments last drawn by him which would be subject to the final decision that
may be made in regard to the actual scale of pay to which he is eligible and on
the basis of which pension may be computed.
Arrears
paid would be adjustable thereafter. Accordingly, direction was given to pay
the pension with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. Thus, this appeal by special
leave.
We
issued notice only to see that when the dispute as regards the computation of
pension is pending, how the liability could be fastened with interest for
non-fixation of the pension. Mr. Pankaj Kalra, learned counsel appearing for
the respondent has stated that the respondent's entitlement is to be computed
on the basis of last drawn scale of pay as found by the High Court which would
be adjusted after the fixation of pay. According to the learned counsel, even
fixation of pay has been correctly done. There fore, there is inaction on the
part of the State in computing the pension payable to the respondent. He
further contends that persons similarly situated are being paid pension while
the same is being denied to the respondent. It is contended by the appellants
that the scale of pay was provisionally fixed and this is matter under
consideration. Until it is decided, the State is unable to determine the
pension payable to the respondent. Under these circumstances, there is no
slackness on the part of the State in determining the pension payable to the
respondent.
Having
considered the respective contentions, we are of the view that the High Court's
view is not correct. So long as the scale of pay to which the respondent is
entitled has not been determined, necessarily the State Government cannot fix
the pension and that is the matter now pending decision in the High Court. No
doubt, specifically no reference is made to the respondent before fixing the
scale of pay and the action of the other subordinates has been impugned by the
State.
Under
these circumstances, the order of the High Court is reversed. The appellants
are directed to compute the pension on the undisputed scale of pay and pay the
same within a period of two months from the date of decision. It would be
subject to the decision in the pending cases. The State is directed to decide
within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The State is
also directed to release the gratuity payable to the respondent within four
weeks from today.
The
appeal is allowed. No costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2