Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of State respondents.
The only grievance of the petitioners is that after regularization vide order dated 16.3.2005 and 30.11.2015, they have not been paid their post retiral dues and pension including their past services rendered on ad hoc basis in the department since 18.06.2008 and 27.03.2000. The services of the petitioners were regularized w.e.f. 16.03.2005. They claimed that in Writ -A No.61974 of 2011, Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and others, filed before Allahabad High Court, in the similar circumstances, this Court has recorded the following finding and allowed the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to count ad hoc services rendered by the petitioner in the department with a further direction to the State Government to calculate his pension and issue the pension payment within two months in as much as to ensure payment of arrears of pension:
"The petitioner was appointed in temporary capacity in Zila Parishad on 21.3.1983. The non-government medical hospitals of Zila Parishad were provincialised on 8.11.1990. The petitioner's option for absorption in the State Ayurvedic and Unani Medical Services was accepted, and that he was taken as a Medical Officer, Ayurvedic and Unani on adhoc basis. There is no denial, that he held a substantive office in a permanent establishment. His services ultimately came to be regularized on 16.3.2005 without any break. At no point of time the petitioner, after his absorption, was not in substantive office, which was not in permanent establishment. His services, therefore, have to be counted with effect from the date of his absorption and the joining in the State Government.
The qualifying service, as defined in sub-rule (8) of Rule 3, includes the service, which qualifies for pension in accordance with the provisions of Section 368 of Civil Services Regulation. The petitioner does not fall in any of the exceptions inasmuch as the period of his temporary service was not in a non-pensionable establishment after he was regularized in the State Government.
For the aforesaid reasons, we find that the petitioner has rendered qualifying pensionary service with effect from the date of his joining in the State Government on his option, and which shall be treated as service qualifying for pension and for which under the Government Orders, by which the hospitals were provincialised, the contribution of his pension has been deposited by the Zila Parishad.
The objection, that the contribution of pension, has not been deposited in the relevant account head, is too technical to be accepted. The amount has been credited to the account of the State Government in the Treasury. It is for the Treasury Officer to appropriate the amount in the correct account head. An error in depositing the amount in the wrong account head cannot be treated to have taken away the right of petitioner to pension based upon his continuance in the State Government beginning from 1991.
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.9.2011 is quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled to pension with effect from 01.2.1991, the date on which he joined in the State Government. The State Government will calculate his pension and issue the pension payment order within two months. The entire arrears of pension shall be paid over to him within a period of three months."
Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners' case is also similar to that of Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava (supra). Prayer has been made for a direction to appropriate authority to consider claim of petitioners in the light thereof.
Considering innocuous prayer being made by learned counsel for petitioners and without entering into merits of the case, petitioners are granted liberty to file separate fresh representations with regard to their claim. In case such representations are preferred by petitioners, the opposite party No.1 i.e. Principal Secretary, Ayush Anubhag, Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow shall decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him. The petitioners shall also annex a copy of the judgment rendered in Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava's case. The representation shall be considered in the light of the aforesaid judgment, in case the same is applicable.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 prabhat