Prem Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

21.9.2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr Nishant Sharma – for petitioner BY THE COURT: The petitioner is aggrieved by denial of retiral benefit. When the representation was made he was granted provisional pension vide order dated 11.5.2012 at Annexure-12. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to the pension higher than what has been granted and other benefits. His past services have not been counted by the respondents, therefore, a direction may be given to revise the retiral benefits after counting entire length of service. I find that earlier when the retiral benefits were not granted to the petitioner, he approached the respondents by making a representation. Provisional pension order was given, which, according to the petitioner is short. If that is so, nobody prevented the petitioner to submit a representation again to the respondents before approaching this court. 2 In view of aforesaid, writ petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the respondents indicating short remittance of retiral benefits and for grant of all retiral benefits after counting his entire length of service. In case of representation, respondents are directed to consider and decide the same within a period of one month from the date of its receipt. It goes without saying that if petitioner is entitled to the revised retiral benefits, it would be extended to the petitioner without dragging him for further litigation. In case no claim is admissible to the petitioner, it may be conveyed by a speaking order within the time as given above. (MN BHANDARI), J. bnsharma All corrections made in the judgment/ order have been incorporated in the judgment/ order being emailed. (BN Sharma) PS-cum-JW