- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents -JSEB.
(2.) THIS instant writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: - (i) to direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 42,000/ -to the petitioner which has illegally been withhold/recovered by the respondents on account of penal rent from the petitioner without giving him any opportunity of being heard and in arbitrary manner. (ii) to quash/set aside that part of the office order no. -218 dated 16.08.2003 issued under the pen and signature of General Manager -cum -Chief Engineer (Respondent No. -3) whereby a sum of Rs. 20,220/ -has been recovered from the Gratuity of the petitioner illegally in arbitrary manner without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Petitioner had earlier moved this Court in W.P.(S) No. 3636 of 2002 for payment of the entire retirement benefits of the petitioner and the said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 21.02.2003 with a direction to the respondents to release the entire retiral dues including the Provident Fund amount within a period of six weeks from the date of production of copy of this order and observation was also made that the petitioner shall also be entitled to statutory interest on the retiral dues payable to him. Thereafter, petitioner had approached this Court by filing Contempt Case (Civil) No. 704 of 2003, which was disposed of on 11.01.2005 wherein this Court directed the petitioner to vacate the occupied quarter within seven days and whatever the balance amount payable to the petitioner shall be paid within seven days thereafter. The petitioner vacated the said quarter on 22nd January, 2005, thereafter, payment of the retirement benefits and pensions under the different heads were paid to the petitioner, but the respondents have charged penal rent from 28.02.2001 to 22.01.2005 and a sum of Rs. 42,000/ -has been withheld by the respondents on account of the said penal rent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that vide office order no. 218 dated 16.08.2003, a sum of Rs. 1,78,728 was sanctioned as DCR Gratuity, but, a sum of Rs. 20,220/ -was directed to be recovered and in fact the same was recovered from the Gratuity of the petitioner.
(3.) RESPONDENTS have appeared and filed their counter affidavit in which it has been stated in para -6 to the counter affidavit that Rs. 20,220/ -is required to be recovered for excess payment during the service period of the petitioner and it was found during the revised pay fixation by the Audit Department. They have further stated that petitioner continuously occupied the official quarter, although he retired on 28 February, 2001, which was ultimately vacated in the year 2005 pursuant to the order of this Court i.e. after four years of his retirement, therefore, respondents have charged penal rent from the petitioner as per the Board rules.;