CW4054/1999 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4054/1999 Smt. Pushpawanti Johar Vs. Rajasthan Agricultural University and Others Date of Order ::: 22.11.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq None present for petitioner Shri Sarvesh Jain, Counsel for Respondents #### By the Court:- None has appeared on behalf of petitioner even in second round, however, matter was considered finally on the basis of pleadings of petitioner and arguments of counsel for respondents. Dispute lies in narrow compass; petitioner is claiming payment of gratuity in sum of Rs.50,000/- whereas respondents have paid him Rs.39,873/-. According to petitioner gratuity should be computed on basis of basic salary at rate of Rs.3000/- prevalent in 1998 whereas respondents are disputing his claim contending that petitioner retired from service on attaining age of superannuation on 30.06.1992; they have already paid to him a sum of Rs.37,723/- and only difference of amount of Rs.2062/- is payable. Other contention raised in this petition is that a judgment was rendered by Single Bench of this Court CW4054/1999 // 2 // at Principal Seat, Jodhpur, in Writ Petition No.3242/1993 – Ramkishan Vyas Vs. Rajasthan Agricultural University, decided on 09.03.1995, wherein respondents were directed to compute gratuity by including dearness allowance and other allowances. Respondents filed Special Appeal (Writ) No.572/1995, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 12.09.1995; there-against respondents filed Special Leave Petition, which too was dismissed by Supreme Court. Respondents have not denied this plea specifically set up by petitioner that said judgment dated 09.03.1995 thus attained finality and is binding on respondents. Other claim is in regard to difference of encashment of privilege leave according to latest fixation of basic pay at Rs.3000/- in 1998. When petitioner stood retired in 1992, there was no reason why basic pay of Rs.3000/- should be taken as basis for computation for his gratuity and encashment of privilege leave. Respondents, in my view, have rightly calculated those dues on the basis of basic pay of petitioner prevalent at the time of retirement i.e. Rs.2750/-. However, as regards to inclusion of dearness allowance in salary in terms of SB judgment of this court, which was upheld by DB and Supreme Court, respondents are liable to make such payment to petitioner by recomputing gratuity amount. In result, this writ petition is partly CW4054/1999 // 3 // allowed. Respondents are directed to recompute gratuity of petitioner in terms of judgment dated 09.03.1995, referred to above, and pay to petitioner arrears of such gratuity together with interest at rate of 9% per annum after deducting amount of Rs.37,723/- which has already been paid. Compliance of judgment be made within a period of three months. A copy of this order be sent to petitioner for information. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//