- (1.) HEARD Sri Ajit Kumar, leaned counsel for the petitioner and J.C. to Sri Siddhartha Rajan, learned counsel for the respondent Electricity Board.
(2.) PETITIONER in this case has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to release and pay the balance gratuity amount of Rs. 54,311 together with interest in the light of the order dated 31.08.2007 passed by a Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 5388 of 2003 and also for a direction to rectify the pay scale of the petitioner by adding two increments which, according to the petitioner, has been illegally curtailed. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction upon the respondents to recalculate the amount of pension and all retiral dues after rectifying the pay scale as legally and legitimately due to him and make the payment of difference amount to him. The petitioner was appointed as a Typist under the respondents on 01.11.1966 and was promoted to the post of Head Clerk and later he was given the Super Selection Grade and finally superannuated on 31.10.2004 in the post of Head Clerk. Prior to his appointment in service under the respondents, the petitioner claims to have completed his Matriculation in February, 1961 itself. It is explained that post retirement, the respondents had with -held a sum of Rs. 54, 311/ - from his retiral benefits. The petitioner filed a writ application vide W.P.(S) No. 5388 of 2003 challenging the retention of the petitioner's money. A plea was taken by the respondents that the said sum was detected to have been obtained by way of excess payment by the petitioner. Upon detection of the mistake and rectification of the pay scale for which the petitioner was entitled, the amount obtained by the petitioner by way of excess payment, was assessed and the same was with -held for payment.
(3.) IT appears that by the order dated 31.08.2007 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) 5388 of 2003, the respondents were restrained from recovering any amount on the plea of excess payment from the retiral benefits of the petitioner though with an observation that the respondents are entitled to rectify the mistake, if any. It is informed by the learned counsel for the respondent Electricity Board that he has received the oral instruction on the basis of which he informs that the amount which was earlier with -held has since been released and paid to the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner is however not in a position to affirm and submits that the Respondent's claim in this regard would be subject to verification.;