IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 8979/2008 Reserved on: 21.4.2011 Decided on:29.4.2011 _____________________________________________ Smt. Ishwari Devi Justa. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the petitioner : Mr. Peeyush Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional A.G. with Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy. A.G. and Mr. R.P. Singh, Asst. A.G. ____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Petitioner was appointed as Primary Teacher in the respondent-Department in the year 1955. She was transferred from Government Primary School, Barion to Government Primary School, Galehan in the month of May, 1987. Petitioner made a representation pursuant to which the order issued in the month of May, 1987 was stayed. However, it was vacated on 18.2.1988 vide Annexure A-1. Petitioner, as per material placed on record, was relieved 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 from duty on 3.3.1988 (Annexure R-1). She was promoted to the post of Centre Head Teacher on 14.6.1989. Since the petitioner had not joined her duties at the new place of posting, her explanation was sought on 16.8.1989 vide Annexure A-4 by the District Primary Education Officer, Shimla, District Shimla. Block Primary Education Officer, Kotkhai Block, Kotkhai, Shimla informed the District Primary Education Officer, Shimla on 31.3.1990 that the petitioner has not complied with the orders nor she has filed any reply to the explanation sought by the office of the District Primary Education Officer. Block Primary Education Officer, Kotkhai also informed the District Primary Education Officer that she was relieved by the Centre Head Teacher, Barion on 3.3.1988. Petitioner was transferred to Government Primary School, Kiari on 26.4.1990. She joined her duties on 1.8.1990. She has retired on 30.4.1995. She has not been paid her salary with effect from 3.3.1988 to 31.7.1990. The pay of the petitioner with effect from August, 1990 to October, 1990 has been released during the pendency of the petition. She has also not been paid pensionary/retiral benefits after her retirement on 30.4.1995 only on the pretext that the petitioner has remained willfully absent with effect from 3.3.1988 to 31.7.1990. 3 2. What emerges from the facts enumerated hereinabove is that the petitioner had been relieved on 3.3.1988 vide Annexure R-1. She should have joined her duties immediately after the orders were passed on 18.2.1988. There is no tangible material placed on record by the petitioner that how she has worked when she was relieved by the Centre Head Teacher, Barion on 3.3.1988. She joined her duties after promotion to the post of Centre Head Teacher only on 1.8.1990. The entry of willful absence was also recorded in the service book of the petitioner placed on record by the respondents-State with effect from March, 1988 to July, 1990. Petitioner had not chosen to file any reply to the explanation dated 16.8.1989. In all fairness the petitioner should have filed the reply to the explanation dated 16.8.1989 to explain her position. As noticed above, the petitioner was relieved by the Centre Head Teacher, Barion to Government Primary School, Galehan on 3.3.1988. She has also been called upon to supply the necessary documents to process her case for pensionary/retiral benefits, as is evident from Annexure R-4 dated 20.2.1998. 3. Petitioner had joined her duties as Primary Teacher in March, 1955. She has retired on 30.4.1995. It is intriguing to note that the case of the petitioner till date has 4 not been processed for pensionary/retiral benefits. The pensionary/retiral benefits were to be paid to the petitioner immediately after her retirement on 30.4.1995. Petitioner, at least should have been granted provisional pension, as per the provisions of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. It is true that the petitioner, as per the material placed on record, remained willfully absent with effect from 3.3.1988 to 31.7.1990. The respondent-Department could regularize this period by sanctioning extraordinary leave to mitigate the hardship faced by the petitioner. The pensionary/retiral benefits have been stopped only on the pretext that the period with effect from 3.3.1988 to 31.7.1990 has not been regularized. The action of the respondents of not releasing the pensionary/retiral benefits to the petitioner is purely and surely illegal and arbitrary. There is non-application of mind on the part of the respondents. 4. Petitioner has been made to wait for the release of pensionary/retiral benefits for more than 16 years. She has served the department for about 40 years. 5. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to pay and release the 5 pensionary/retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of 6 weeks. Since the petitioner has retired on 30.4.1995 and has now attained the age of 71 years, the period with effect from 4.3.1988 to 31.7.1990 shall stand regularized by sanctioning the leave of kind due. The pensionary/retiral benefits shall carry interest @ 7% per annum. Needful be done within a period of 6 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 29.4. 2011 *awasthi*