Hon'ble Vedpal,J.
Heard learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners and Shri H.P.Singh for the private respondent.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners against the judgment and order dated 22.4.1998 by which the Tribunal has allowed the claim petition by setting aside the order dated 3.7.1992 and 26.11.1992 whereby the Tribunal directed the opposite parties to count the qualifying services rendered by the claimant/respondent as Cooperative Supervisor for resettlement of the retiral benefits and payment thereof to him, with interest @ 12% per annum. The Tribunal further directed to consider and settle the claimant's claim for payment of outstanding balance of G.P.F. amount alongwith interest at the relevant rate in the G.P.F. account and the Tribunal further directed that claimant shall be deemed to have been confirmed to the post from the date juniors to him, were confirmed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that initially the appointment of the claimant was made on the post of Cooperative Supervisor in the Provincial Cooperative Union Ltd. and thereafter he was appointed on the post of Farming Supervisor in the Cooperative Department of the State Government and he joined on 19.1.1960. Thereafter, he was sent on deputation as Cooperative Supervisor in the year 1968 and he was subsequently promoted as Cooperative Inspector Group- II and joined as Cooperative Inspector Group-II on 16.2.1979 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.1986.
The Tribunal did not accept the submissions of the counsel for the State that the claimant had given his consent for non government service and had not worked from 22.7.1968 to 15.2.1979, and discharged duties in the Government. The Tribunal found that no consent was given by the claimant for being sent to serve as Farming Supervisor. He was neither absorbed in the non Government establishment nor he was made to retire from non government service before his appointment as Cooperative Supervisor. He cannot be made to suffer simply by obeying the order of employer, to be sent on deputation in non government organization. The State did not place any material either in the Tribunal or before this Court to demonstrate that claimant had given his consent and that he was absorbed in the Cooperative Society as Cooperative Inspector Group-II. His services therefore, rendered in the Cooperative Society, as :2: Cooperative Inspector Group-II could not be discontinued for giving him service benefit in the Cooperative Department.
The petitioner's claim for confirmation on the post of Cooperative Inspector Group II was not accepted by the Tribunal on the ground that it was not clear from the record whether the petitioner was appointed as ad hoc basis or substantively and that in the absence of specific rules the claim was not admissible.
The petitioner was not absorbed or regularized as Cooperative Supervisor. His lien in the Cooperative Department in the State Government was never ceased. The period during which the petitioner served as Cooperative Supervisor from 22.07.1968 to 15.02.1979 was rightly counted for retiral benefits.
We do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
11.1.2010.
Tripathi.