Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Parmar Ambalal Barkorbhai vs State Of Gujarat & 3

High Court Of Gujarat|14 June, 2012
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs;
A) Admit and allow the petition with costs and consequential relief.
B) Quash and set aside impugned Order at Annexure - “D”.
C) Direct the Respondent to clear the pension papers of the petitioner. Decide his pension with effect from 23.05.1994, i.e. since his voluntary retirement and Direct them to pay arrears as well as the Regular Pension, LTC, Gratuity and other retire dues as applicable in his case.
(C )(a) That the respondents may please be directed to take the petitioner back on the job in the event of his case lacking the eligibility to VRS and consequent pension/retiral benefits either for the want requisite tenure of service or for any other reason and they may also be ordered to make him the payment of his wages for the intervening period i.e. from 23.05.1994 till he is taken back on the job.
(D) xxx”
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this petition are that the petitioner was working as Assistant Machine Man under the Government Printing and Stationary Department, Vadodara and from where he opted for voluntary Retirement since 22.5.1994. In pursuance of his request, the Manager, Government Press and Stationary Department, Vadodara, vide Office order No. E-2/pension/929, dated 27.04.1996, the petitioner was made to retire w.e.f. 22.5.1994. Therefore, vide letter dated E-2/1998, dated 17.6.1996, the respondent No.3 called upon the petitioner for submitting the photographs.
2.1. Thereafter, vide order dated 4.10.1987, the order pertaining to voluntary retirement was reversed and he was relieved w.e.f. 22.5.1994. Thereafter vide order dated 20.7.1998 the petitioner received an amount of Rs.5884/-. However, the petitioner has not been paid the pension since 23.5.1994 and other retiral dues, therefore, the petitioner has filed this petition petition.
3. Heard learned advocate for the respective parties. From the record it is clear that the petitioner had not voluntarily retired from the service. Therefore, he is not entitled to the benefits of voluntary retirement. Before voluntary retirement is proposed to be taken, one has to give Notice in writing about such intention to the competent authority before three months. However, in the present case, the the same has not been done by the petitioner.
4. Apart from that as per the relevant Rules the employee concerned mus have completed 20 years of continuous service. In the present case, the petitioner has not completed the requisite years' of service as well. Therefore, on the above two counts, the petitioner is not entitled to claim the benefits of voluntary retirement. Further in view of Rule 250 of B.C.S.R., the services of the petitioner was not found to be 'continuous'.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the present petition deserves to be dismissed, the same is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
[K.S.JHAVERI,J.] pawan
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Parmar Ambalal Barkorbhai vs State Of Gujarat & 3

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
14 June, 2012
Judges
  • Ks Jhaveri
Advocates
  • Mr Nilesh M Shah