Radhakant Goswami Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. .....disposal of the writ petition under the hearing for admission.3. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has not disputed the said fact.4. in view of the above, this interlocutory application is allowed. the writ petition shall be heard today itself, as there is no objection from any party.5. i.a. no. 1357 of 2008 stands disposed of.w.p.(s) no. 7778 of 20066. in this writ petition, the petitioner has made two prayer, one for a direction on the respondents to pay the consolidated pension to the petitioner, which is payable to the retired employee of the university, who retired prior to 1.1.1996 and another for a direction on the respondents to pay the arrears of consolidated pension to the petitioner, which has been paid to the employees of other universities.7. it has been stated that the petitioner retired as university professor from sahibganj college of sidhu kanu murmu university (university for short) in september, 1993. the petitioner, after retirement, is entitled to get all the retiral benefits, including the consolidated pension.8. during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner is now being paid consolidated pension w.e.f. march, 2004, but the.....

Judgment:

ORDER

N.N. Tiwari, J.

1. In this interlocutory application, the petitioner has prayed for early hearing and disposal of the writ petition.

2. It has been stated that the petitioner is an old man aged about 75 years and has been suffering from heart ailment and on that ground has prayed for fixation of early date of heading for disposal of the writ petition under the hearing for admission.

3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has not disputed the said fact.

4. In view of the above, this interlocutory application is allowed. The writ petition shall be heard today itself, as there is no objection from any party.

5. I.A. No. 1357 of 2008 stands disposed of.

W.P.(S) No. 7778 of 2006

6. In this writ petition, the petitioner has made two prayer, one for a direction on the respondents to pay the consolidated pension to the petitioner, which is payable to the retired employee of the University, who retired prior to 1.1.1996 and another for a direction on the respondents to pay the arrears of consolidated pension to the petitioner, which has been paid to the employees of other Universities.

7. It has been stated that the petitioner retired as University Professor from Sahibganj College of Sidhu Kanu Murmu University (University for short) in September, 1993. The petitioner, after retirement, is entitled to get all the retiral benefits, including the consolidated pension.

8. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner is now being paid consolidated pension w.e.f. March, 2004, but the arrears of consolidated pension has not been paid till date in spite of several requests and representations.

9. Mr. S. Piprawall, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the University, submitted that the University has already implemented the Scheme and the consolidated pension is being paid to its employees and the petitioner has been getting the same w.e.f. March. 2004. So far as arrears of consolidated pension is concerned, the University, which is dependent on the fund of the State-respondents, has already requested for allotment of fund, but till date, required fund has not been received by the University for payment of the arrears of consolidated pension to its employees.

10. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State-respondents stating, inter alia, that the petitioner retired as an employee of the University and as such, it is the liability of the University to pay the arrears of the petitioner.

Mr. H.K. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, submitted that any requisition made by the University regarding the required fund, shall consider and the necessary order shall be passed.

11. In view of the contentions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Vice-Chancellor of the University, who on receipt of the representation, shall be considered the same and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of representation.

12. If the petitioner, is found entitled to get the consolidated pension since the date of his retirement the arrears with statutory interest shall be paid by the University, within a period of six weeks thereafter. In case, any fund to that regard is required to be given by the State Government, the same, on requisition of the University, shall be released forthwith, so that the amount of the arrears of consolidated pension can be paid to the petitioner within the said prescribed period. If the petitioner's admissible amount is not paid within the said period, the same shall carry interest @ 10% per annum till final payment.