Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the State of U.P. Through the Secretary (Transport) U.P. Lucknow as respondent No. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall handover the copy of the petition to learned Standing Counsel for follow up action.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petition, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the pension and other retiral benefit to the petitioner with immediate effect together with interest of 16% on the delayed payment. Further prayer is to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to insist for refund of the employer's share of E.P. Fund and to adjust the same from the amount of arrears of pension.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the petitioner was appointed as conductor in the erstwhile U.P. Government Roadways against pensionable post w.e.f. 2.2.52. The services of the petitioner was confirmed as permanent conductor w.e.f. 1.4.1956. Before issuance of the Government Order dated 16.9.60 by which the revised terms and condition of services was introduced. The petitioner was promoted to the post of clerk w.e.f. 1.12.1956 and continued to work till 15.11.1998. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of senior clerk w.e.f. 16.11.78 as accountant w.e.f. 1998. The petitioner retired after noon w.e.f. 31.8.1988 after completing the age of 58 years. The petitioner retired from the post of accountant and there was representation as well as recommendation of the authorities concerned to grant of pension to the petitioner who belonged to the erstwhile U.P. Government Roadways who were working on any permanent post on or before the creation of U.P.S.R.T.C. There were Government Orders that the pension would be provided to such employees if they were willing to refund the share of employer's share provided pension and excess payment of gratuity. The representation of the petitioner was that share of E.P.F. be adjusted and for balance pension direction be issued for payment. However, when the pension was not paid to the petitioner then the present writ petition has been filed. The Assistant General Manager (F) sent a detailed letter to General Manager (Pension) on 18.9.1996 for grant of pension. Till date pension has not been paid to the petitioner instead of insisting the petitioner to deposit the employer's share in E.P.F. and excess payment of gratuity might be adjusted from arrears of the pension, hence the direction be issued for payment of pension after adjustment of share of the petitioner in Employee Provident Fund and excess amount, if any of the gratuity.;