1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1908/2004. : : Karimuddin Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 7.1.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.N.R.Saran for Mr.G.S.Bapna for the petitioner. Mr.Umesh Shringi for Mr.Manoj Pareek for respondent. Mr.Aklesh Jain, Dy.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by non-payment of his retiral dues including the pension from the date petitioner retired. The petitioner, who was working with the Construction Wing of Municipal Corporation, Jaipur on the post of Beldar retired from service on 30.6.2001. The petitioner was neither paid pension nor was he granted the benefit of selection scale, which became due to him upon completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service. When the payment of pension, gratuity and provident fund was not made to him even after a period of more than three years lapsed, the petitioner approached this Court by filing present writ petition, which has remained pending for last 2 four years. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that even though the petitioner retired from services of the respondents as far back as on 30.6.2001 but till date none of his dues have been paid. He therefore prays that the writ petition be allowed and the respondents be directed to pay the aforesaid dues together with interest @ 18% per annum. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Beldar with the Municipal Corporation, Jaipur w.e.f. 30.1.1970 and not from 1959 as alleged by the petitioner. It was argued that complete record with regard to service career of the petitioner is with the respondents. The petitioner was required to produce the date of birth certificate as well as fitness certificate. Reference in this regard was made to letter dated 15.3.201. It was also contended that pension papers of the petitioner could not be timely prepared because the petitioner did not corporate in preparation of his pension papers and the same only could be prepared in 2004 and vide letter dated 29.4.2004, such papers were forwarded to the Deputy Director (Regional) Local Bodies, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur, according to which the petitioner was entitled to receive the amount of gratuity 3 and dearness allowance, leave encashment etc totaling Rs.1,20,699/-, but the pension case of the petitioner is still pending and so far has not been finalised. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments aforesaid and perused the material on record. Apart from the fact that the retiral dues of the petitioner have not been paid, a perusal of the averments made in para No.4 of the reply to the writ petition would show that the respondents clearly admitted the entitlement of the petitioner for getting benefit of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service, but they could not give the benefit to the petitioner because he did not supply the date of birth certificate and fitness certificate, therefore, all these benefits could not be given to the petitioner. They have blamed that the petitioner did not co-oporate in preparation of his pension paper which delayed the finalisation of the pension case and ultimately they have said that the case of the petitioner was finalised and forwarded to Deputy Director, Local Bodies on 29.4.2004 counting from that date it would appear that almost four years have gone by, but till date nothing has been received by the petitioner. This case is a classic example of how callous and lackadaisical attitude the Government is having towards 4 its employees especially those working at the lowest ladder. When for three years nothing was paid to him, the helpless petitioner was forced to approach this Court and now four years have gone by when his pension case was forwarded, he has not yet been received his pension. The respondents have no justification as to why the benefits which are due to the petitioner have been paid so much so there is no explanation as to why benefit of selection scale was not granted. There is no justification for the respondents to raise the objection about the proof of date of birth and now after the retirement of the petitioner, requiring the petitioner to prove his date of birth. When they themselves have retired him w.e.f. 30.6.2001 there should be impediment in treating his age as 60 years as on the date on which he was retired and counting his date of birth, which would be on or about 30.6.1941. The respondents have unnecessarily complicated payment of retiral dues of a low paid employee, especially when they themselves have treated the petitioner having attained the age of superannuation and retired on that basis. The petitioner has certainly made out a case not only for grant of mandamus but also for payment of appropriate amount as costs. 5 In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to finalise the pension case of the petitioner and also for selection scale of 9, 18 & 27 years of service and are further directed to pay all his retiral dues including the arrears of pension, which may be recalculated on the basis of revised pay scale. All the arrears shall be paid to the petitioner together with interest @ 6% per annum. The petitioner shall also be additionally entitled for cost of Rs.2500/-. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.21.