Manejan v. The State of Manipur

Judgment

1. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner, Higher & Technical Education to the Govt. of Manipur at the Secretariat Complex, Babupara, Imphal-795001.

2. The Director, Higher & Technical Education, Govt. of Manipur at Keishampat, Imphal-795001.

3. The Accountant General, Manipur, Imphal-795001. ---- Respondents

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.V. MURALIDARAN For the Petitioners For the Respondents :: :: Mr. N. Umakanta, Advocate Mr. Y. Ashang, GA, Mr. S. Samarjeet, Sr.PCCG Date of Hearing and Judgment & Order ::

23.08.2022 WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 2 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction on the respondents to release and pay the partially withheld retiral/terminal benefits of her late husband, including leave encashment and gratuity and also the balance amount arising from the difference between the provisional pension and the full monthly pension for the period from 1.3.2015 till the date of death of her husband on 2.4.2019.

2. Heard Mr. N. Umakanta, the learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Y. Ashang, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. S. Samarjeet, learned Sr.PCCG for the third respondent.

3. Mr. N. Umakanta, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s husband expired on

2.4.2019. He retired from service as Lower Division Clerk on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.2.2015 and that while he was in service, the petitioner’s husband was implicated in departmental cases as well as vigilance cases for which he was placed under suspension on 3.10.2005 under the contemplation of departmental enquiry. He would submit that since the departmental enquiry was not initiated against him for quite some WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 3 time, the petitioner’s husband filed W.P.(C) No.528 of 2010 before this Court and pursuant to the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner’s husband was reinstated into service on

21.2.2011. Thereafter, the departmental enquiry proceeded and her husband was imposed minor penalty of withholding of two increments of his monthly salary.

4. The learned counsel further submitted that in the meantime the petitioner’s husband retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.2.2015. However, in view of the registration of two FIR cases by the vigilance police, wherein her late husband was allegedly an accused, the retiral benefits were not disbursed stating that Criminal (P) Case No.56 of 2017 and Criminal (P) No.27 of 2018 were pending.

5. The learned counsel next submitted that aggrieved by the non-payment of the retiral benefits, the petitioner’s husband filed W.P.(C) No.770 of 2015 and by the interim order dated

16.6.2017, this Court directed for releasing of the provisional pension. Pursuant to the interim order of this Court, provisional pension was paid to her husband. While so, on 2.4.2019, the petitioner’s husband died after prolonged illness and the petitioner was allowed to enjoy the family pension on the death of her WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 4 husband. However, the benefit of leave encashment and gratuity were withheld on the ground that FIR cases were pending against her husband.

6. The learned counsel further submitted that the two FIR cases were taken up for trial by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoubal and in view of the death of her husband on

2.4.2019, those two cases were closed by the learned Magistrate by the order dated 30.1.2021. In view of the closure of the criminal cases, now the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of her late husband, namely leave encashment payment, gratuity, apart from balance pension amount payable to him from the date of his retirement till his death during which he was paid only provisional pension and not full pension. Thus, a prayer is made to issue direction on the respondents to release and pay the aforesaid dues.

7. Mr. Y. Ashang, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the reinstatement of the petitioner’s husband is without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings contemplated against him and pending criminal cases/vigilance cases and that by the order dated

18.2.2015, he was allowed to retire from service on attaining the WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 5 age of superannuation on 28.2.2015. Since criminal cases are pending against the petitioner’s husband, certain benefits due to him were withheld and those cases were closed only on 30.1.2021 as abated. He would submit that the non-releasing of certain retiral benefits to the petitioner’s husband is not wanton.

8. Mr. S. Samarjeet, the learned Sr.PCCG for the third respondent submitted that the office of the third respondent has no power to implement decisions that are not in consonance with rules, regulation and Government instructions and that the power to relax the rules or waive any condition rests solely with the Government and it is only after the State Government issues a specific order in compliance of a Court’s order, either relaxing the rules/instructions, the third respondent can implement such decisions/order. He would submit that the third respondent implements the decisions taken by the State authorities in various issues relating to maintenance of GPF, pension and gazetted entitlement.

9. The learned counsel further submitted that scrutiny of pension papers and service records is the bounden duty of the third respondent and on receipt of pension papers and sanction of quantum of provision pension, provisional pension at the rate of WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 6 Rs.5645/- per month has already been authorised to the petitioner’s husband. He added that no order of the State Government regularising the pension and other retirement benefits are received till date and unless the aforesaid orders are received, the office of the third respondent is not in a position to process for finalisation of the retirement benefits of the petitioner’s husband. As such, there is no action pending on the part of the third respondent.

10. This Court considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

11. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s husband retired from service on 28.2.2015, however, purportedly on the ground that he was implicated in two FIR cases, his retiral benefits were not released and paid, for which the petitioner’s husband approached this Court and this Court ordered payment of provisional pension to him as an interim measure. After getting his provisional pension till his death on 2.4.2019 and thereafter, the petitioner was allowed to enjoy family pension till today. The complaint cases were closed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoubal on 30.1.2021 as abated after the demise of WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 7 the petitioner’s husband. In view of the closure of the complaint cases arising out of two FIRs, now the petitioner seeking release and pay her the other withheld retiral benefits i.e., leave encashment and gratuity and also difference of the balance amount of provisional pension and monthly pension payable to the petitioner’s late husband from 1.8.2015 till his death.

12. The petitioner’s husband who was working as LDC of Thoubal College was allowed to retire from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.2.2015. While he was under suspension, the petitioner’s husband was allowed to retire. After retirement, since the retiral benefits were not released on the ground of two FIR cases pending against him, the petitioner’s husband filed W.P.(C) No.770 of 2015 and pursuant to the interim order dated 16.6.2017, he was paid provisional pension. The petitioner’s husband died on 2.4.2019 and thereafter, the petitioner is receiving family pension. After the death of the petitioner’s husband, two criminal cases viz., Criminal (P) Case No.56 of 2017 and Criminal (C) No.27 of 2018 are closed as abated. In the background aforesaid, now the grievance of the petitioner is that she is entitled to the withheld retiral benefits of her late husband and also the balance pension amount payable to her husband from the retirement to his death. WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 8

13. It appears that before filing this writ petition, on

19.2.2021, narrating all these facts, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents. Since no action was taken on it, the petitioner approached this Court. The receipt of the representation dated 19.2.2021 has not been disputed by the respondents.

14. Since the withholding of the retiral benefits due to the petitioner’s husband namely leave encashment payment and gratuity on the ground of pendency of the two criminal cases and after the death of the petitioner’s husband, the two criminal cases are closed as abated, now the petitioner is entitled to the said benefits. That apart, she is also entitled to the difference pension amount payable to her husband from the time of his retirement i.e.

25.2.2015 till his death i.e. 2.4.2019. As stated supra, on

19.2.2021 the petitioner had submitted a representation and the same has not been considered and disposed of by the respondents till date. Therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner positively in the interest of justice.

15. In the result, (1) The writ petition is allowed. WP(C) No. 281 of 2021 P a g e | 9 (2) The concerned respondent authorities are directed to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated

19.2.2021 in releasing the withholding of retiral benefits, namely encashment and gratuity due petitioner’s husband and also difference pension amount payable to him from the date of his retirement till his death since during the said period he was paid only provisional pension. (3) The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (4) No costs. JUDGE FR/NFR Sushil WP(C) No. 281 of 2021