SUDESH SODHI Vs. M C SHIMLA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who is 72 years of age, aggrieved by the order dated 20.4.2012 Annexure P-4, granting thereby gratuity to the tune of Rs.2,04,914/- as one time settlement on the minimum of pay-scale of Warden i.e. Rs.5910+1950 G.P., has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition for quashing the same with a further prayer to fix her salary over and above that of Class-IV employees and to release all consequential benefits together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

(2.) Himachal Kalyan Nidhi (Regd.) a Public Charitable Trust C/O Him Kesri, Ritz Cinema Building, Shimla, had been carrying on various activities, charitable in nature, in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The Trust had also constructed a working women hostel at Sanjauli, for which major financial assistance was being granted by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt. of India. The land for construction of hostel was leased out by respondent No.1-Corporation. The hostel was being run by the Trust for providing housing facility to the working women in Shimla. The petitioner was working as Warden in the hostel. When the Trust due to financial constraints found it difficult to run the affairs of the hostel in an effective manner, it agreed to transfer all its assets and liabilities to the 1st respondent, after obtaining the approval of Govt. of India. An agreement Annexure P-6 to this effect was entered into between Smt. Satya Wati Parmar, Chairman of the Trust and the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Shimla on 20.12.1990. The terms and conditions as agreed upon, inter alia, reads as follows:

(3.) Vide resolution passed by the 1st respondentCorporation on 30.6.2010, the petitioner, who had attained the age of more than 58 years, however, was ordered to be retired from service on payment of a sum of Rs.33,000/- equivalent to six months salary in lump sum towards retiral benefits. Aggrieved thereby she preferred Civil Writ Petition No.3560/2010 in this Court which was allowed by a coordinate Bench of this Court and the resolution retiring her was quashed with further direction to the said respondents that since she has managed the affairs of the hostel for 12 years even after attaining the age of superannuation, she can be considered to be capable of doing such work, especially when there is nothing on record indicating that she is not physically or mentally fit for the job. Learned Single judge has further held that since the agreement whereby the Working Women Hostel was handed over to the respondent-Corporation provides for the management of the affairs by the Managing Committee, therefore, neither the Commissioner nor the respondent-Corporation had any authority to dispense with the services of the petitioner. The judgment so passed by learned Single Judge is Annexure P-1.