Punjab-Haryana High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited ... vs Narinder Mohan Arya on 21 August, 2012
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Hemant Gupta, Rajiv Narain Raina
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.1171 of 2012 in
Civil Writ Petition No.7690 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of Decision:21.8.2012
United India Insurance Company Limited and another
...... Appellants
Versus
Narinder Mohan Arya
...... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
****
Present: Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the appellants.
****
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
****
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
Challenge in this appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 29.5.2012 allowing the writ petition with a direction to the United India Insurance Company-appellant to calculate the annual increments of the writ petitioner/respondent as well as the revision of scales of pay from time to time from the date of termination on 24.7.1979 till he would have retired on reaching the age of superannuation. The learned Single Judge has also ordered that the amounts would carry interest @ 7.5% for the arrears of salary, besides, he would be deemed to be admitted in pension scheme and arrears of pension would also be calculated and released within the time LPA No.1171 of 2012 (O&M) -2- specified with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The writ petitioner/respondent has also been held entitled to the arrears on account of gratuity calculated as though he continued in service till retirement and the amount also be paid within the time specified. The writ petitioner/respondent would have superannuated from service on 30.4.1998.
The writ petitioner-respondent/Narinder Mohan Arya after disciplinary proceedings were initiated as long as back as 1976 has been subjected to long and protracted litigation against his dismissal from service and till his appeal was finally allowed by the Supreme Court on 5.4.2006 in the case titled Narinder Mohan Arya versus United India Insurance Company Limited; 2006(4) SCC 713. It has been recorded in the judgment that "he, indisputably, had suffered a lot". On thread bare consideration of the matter, the Supreme Court ordered his reinstatement to service but directed 50% of the back wages as payable keeping in view the fact that no work has been taking from him in the interregnum. The writ- petitioner/respondent was deprived of consequential benefits of service resulting from reinstatement including usual annual increments, revision of scales of pay including re-fixation for the purpose of pension etc.; the claim for pension being based on having been deprived of a right to exercise option for his coming over from Contributory Provident Fund Scheme to pension scheme on account of his remaining out of service by an unlawful order. On deprivation of consequential benefits, the writ- petitioner/respondent had to again approach this Court in a writ petition from which this appeal arises.
The learned Single Judge has found merit in granting monetary benefits to the writ petitioner/respondent as naturally flowing out from the LPA No.1171 of 2012 (O&M) -3- judgment of the Supreme Court. However, the claim for promotion from the date juniors were promoted has been declined on the ground that those promotions were to selection posts with consideration of merit which it would be impossible to assess at this stage. Those promotions were not made on seniority alone.
We have heard Mr. D.R. Bansal, learned counsel for the appellants and would only say that the manner in which the appellant- Insurance Company has behaved in compelling the litigation from 1976 to 2011 does not redound to the credit of an instrumentality of the State.
We find no ground to interject in the well reasoned order of learned Single Judge and would dismiss the appeal in limine as not warranting interference.
( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( RAJIV NARAIN RAINA )
JUDGE JUDGE
21.8.2012
rajeev