Gujarat High Court High Court

Karunashankar vs State on 12 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Karunashankar vs State on 12 October, 2010
Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/12353/2007	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12353 of 2007
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

KARUNASHANKAR
MANISHANKAR JOSHI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
AJ YAGNIK for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR
HEMANT MAKWANA AGP  for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 08/05/2007 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Heard
the learned advocate, Mr.A.J.Yagnik, appearing on behalf of
petitioner and learned AGP, Mr.Makwana, appearing on behalf of
petitioner.

2. The
petitioner retired as a College Teacher after three decades of his
blotless service on 31.10.1996. He was denied pension and gratuity
amount by the respondents. Therefore, he preferred an application
No.56/1998 before the Gujarat Affiliated Colleges Service Tribunal
praying interim relief for pensionary benefits and gratuity. The
Tribunal passed an order in favour of petitioner directing the
respondents to disburse the pensionary and gratuity benefits within
four weeks by order dated 9.12.2002. The aforesaid order was
challenged by respondents before this Court by way of SCA
No.12622/2003 wherein initially petitioner was admitted and stay was
granted by this Court and thereafter, the matter was decided on
1.3.2006. While dismissing the aforesaid petition of State of
Gujarat, they were directed to pay pensionary and gratuity benefits
to the petitioner but, till date, no payment is made to the
petitioner by the respondents. Therefore, contempt notice dated
18.4.2006 was served to the respondents but, no payment is made by
the respondents. On 22.2.2007, Misc. Civil Application was rejected
on the ground that in the order passed in aforesaid SCA, specific
time limit was not prescribed for compliance, therefore, strictly it
cannot be considered to be contempt and then, petitioner has
approached to this Court.

3. Learned
AGP, Mr.Makwana, submitted that if the petitioner will make detailed
representation to the respondents, then, necessary steps will be
taken by the respondents in accordance with law.

4. In
view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned AGP, Mr.Makwana, it
is open for the petitioner to make detailed representation to the
respondents claiming the amount of pension and gratuity from the
respondents, within a period of 15 days from the date of receiving
the copy of this order.

5. As
and when the respondents receive the copy of representation from the
petitioner, the respondents are directed to consider the case of
petitioner claiming benefit of pension and gratuity and if according
to respondents, the order passed by the Tribunal in Application
No.56/1998 dated 9.12.2002 and order passed by this Court in SCA
No.12622/2006 dated 1.3.2006 is not challenged to the higher forum
and there is no dispute about claim of the petitioner for pension and
gratuity in view of the order passed by the Tribunal and the order of
this Court, then, to pay the pensionary benefits and amount of
gratuity to the petitioner immediately without any delay with arrears
of pension and whatever interest is available on the amount of
gratuity and pension to the petitioner, within a period of one
month from the date of receiving the copy of such representation from
the petitioner. However, if respondents have challenged the order
passed by this Court in SCA No.12622 of 2003 dated 1.3.2006 to the
higher forum and if any stay is operating, then, respondents shall
have to pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law,
within a period of one month from the date receiving the copy of this
order.

6. In
view of the above observations and directions, present petition is
disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits. However, in
case if ultimate decision is adverse to the petitioner, it is open
for the petitioner to challenge the same before appropriate forum in
accordance with law. Direct service is permitted.

(H.K.RATHOD,
J)

(vipul)

   

Top