LAKSHMANAN, CJ. - (1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order dated 4. 2. 1997, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 4659/1996.
(2.) THE appellant filed the above writ petition to issue directions to the respondents herein to make payment of the full amount of pension from the date of his retirement with the amount of gratuity and commutation of pension together with the encashment of privilege leave standing at the credit of the appellant on the date of retirement with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The petitioner appellant was employed in the services of the Municipal Council, Jaipur (Now Nagar Nigam, Jaipur) as "bhisthi" on 7. 9. 1958 and continued to serve in that capacity till 27. 10. 1994. According to the appellant, his date of birth is 1. 7. 1936, but it was recorded as 1. 7. 1926 by mistake in the service book of the appellant by the respondents at their own record. The appellant produced a certificate of birth desired by the then Municipal Council, Jaipur, showing his date of birth as 1. 7. 1936 to the respondents and requested to verify the date of birth recorded in the service roll from this certificate and he be retired on the basis of this birth certificate treating the correct date of birth as 1. 7. 1936. The appellant also filed a suit for injunction together with the stay application on 29. 6. 1984 in the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4, Jaipur City requesting for restraining the respondents from retiring the appellant from service on the basis of incorrect date of birth i. e. 1. 7. 1926. The trial court, after hearing both the parties on the stay application, allowed the stay application vide order dated 4. 2. 1985 and ordered that the appellant be continued to work on the post held by him till decision of the suit and he be paid the salary according to the Rules. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the appellant continued in service on the post of "bhishti" till the disposal of the suit. The suit for injunction was dismissed on 21. 9. 1994 but during the pendency of the suit, deciding the issue No. 4, on the ground that the date of retirement (i. e. 30. 6. 1994) of the appellant had already expired during the pendency of the suit.
(3.) PURSUANT to the judgment of the Civil Court, the appellant was retired from service by the Commissioner (Hawa Mahal (East) Zone, on 27. 10. 1994, vide Annex. 1 ). The appellant, after retirement, requested the respondent to grant him retiral benefits like pension, gratuity etc. The appellant also sent a notice for demand of justice to the respondents in this regard. Since the pension was not paid, a writ petition was filed by the appellant, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. ;