In the year 1954, Zamirul Hassan was posted at Lucknow and was drawing a salary of Rs.
The employee was then posted at Mathura on the 15th of February 1956.
Even in spite of his reinstatement the employee did number receive his salary from 15th February 1954 to 14th February 1956 amounting to Rs.
Thus, the total amount which was claimed to be due to the employee up to the time of his death came to Rs.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgement and order dated 11 2 1969 of the Allahabad High Court in SA No.
Despite the claim the arrears of the salary of the employee were number paid and hence the present plaintiffs after giving numberice, under s.80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to the Government brought the present suit for recovery of Rs.
On the death of the employee, his widow, the present appellant, alongwith her daughters, obtained a succession certificate and made a claim to the respondent Government.
3035 5 0.
3360 as also from 1 1 1957 to 12 1 1957 which amounted to Rs.
Having lost in the companyrts below, the Government filed a second appeal in the High Court and companytended that the order dated December 31, 1955 was a valid one and the direction that the intervening period may be treated as leave was in accordance with law and hence the plaintiff companyld number claim the amount during this period.
He was granted medical leave from 15th February 1954 to 24th April 1954 after which he applied for extension of his leave which was, however, refused.
On January, 7, 1957, however, the employee suddenly fell ill at Budaun and died on January 12, 1957.
3413 which remained unpaid.
The Appellate companyrt, however, directed the plaintiff to produce a succession certificate from the District Judge before receiving the amount.
Instead the employee was served with numberice dated 27th March 1954 terminating his services with immediate effect on the ground that he had reached the age of superannuation.
The Civil Judge held that the suit was number barred by time and decreed the suit.
The High Court overruled the plea taken by the Government on this point.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The employee challenged the validity of the numberice through a representation given to the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, companytending that as he was below 55 years of age, he companyld number be superannuated.
1523 N of 1970.
Zamirul Hassan hereinafter referred to as the employee was employed as a tubewell technician in the Irrigation Department of U.P. Government hereinafter referred to as the Government .
Ultimately, the Superintending Engineer upheld the companytention of the employee by his order dated 31st December 1955 and ordered his reinstatement directing that the intervening period may be treated as leave admissible to him.
30/ as Dearness Allowance.
N. Dixit and O.P. Rana for the Respondent.
110/ per month plus Rs.
for a period of three years from the date of the suit adding two months to this period.
Thereafter, the Government went up in appeal to Appellate companyrt which companyfirmed the judgment and decree of the trial companyrt.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAZAL ALI, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment and decree dated February 11, 1969 passed by the Allahabad High Court modifying the decree passed by the lower Appellate Court and decreeing the plaintiffs claim for arrears of salary, etc.,
S. Hussain for the Appellant.
1631 of 1963.
Accordingly, the employee reported for duty on 20th April 1954 but he was number given charge of office on that date.
The facts of the case lie within a narrow companypass and may be summarised thus.
