Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3556 of 2019 Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyan Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner claims to have been initially appointed on temporary basis in January, 1984. His services were later regularised in 1997. Petitioner ultimately attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2018. A grievance was raised before the authorities for counting his services from 19984 to 1997 towards qualifying services for correct determination of his pension. Such claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide order impugned dated 15.09.2018. Thus, aggrieved the petitioner is before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon Rule 3(8) of the U.P. Retirement Benefit Rules, 1961 to submit that continuous temporary or officiating service under the Government of Uttar Pradesh, followed without interruptions by confirmation in the same or any other posts is liable to be counted towards qualifying service for the purposes of payment of pension. It is urged that this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the authority concerned while passing the order impugned. Reliance has also been placed upon a judgment of this Court in Madan Gopal Pandey and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (11) ADJ 92.
Though a counter affidavit is filed and learned Standing Counsel opposes the prayer made in the writ petition but it is not disputed that claim of petitioner for counting his previous service has not been examined with reference to Rule 3(8) of the Rules of 1961.
In such circumstances this petition succeeds and is allowed. A direction is issued to respondent no.3 to accord consideration to petitioner's claim for inclusion of his services from 1984 to 1997, towards qualifying service, keeping in view the provisions contained in Rule 3(8) of the Rules of 1961, by passing a fresh order within a period of three months. Orders impugned dated 16.11.2018 and 15.09.2018 insofar as it rejects petitioner's claim for inclusion of such period stands quashed.
Order Date :- 22.9.2021 Abhishek Singh