Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1498 (RAJ)

Mohammad Shamim v. State of Rajasthan

2009-06-29

PREM SHANKER ASOPA

body2009
JUDGMENT 1. - By this writ petition, the petitioner is claiming the benefit of service for the purpose of pension, rendered by him from 3.7.1961 to 27.8.1969 with the Central Government in Indian Posts and Telegraphs Department. He has further prayed for re-calculation of qualifying service and to make the payment of other retiral benefits. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Temporary Telephone Operator on 24.7.1961 in the Indian Posts and Telegraphs Department of the Central Government. Thereafter, he was confirmed on 31.7.1968. On being selected as Sub Inspector (Prosecution), the petitioner resigned from the post of Telephone Operator and was relieved on 27.8.1969. He submitted his joining report in the Police Department on the post of Sub Inspector (Prosecution) on 28.8.1969. Hence, there is no break in his service rendered in the Central Government and starting of service in the State Government. It is stated in the writ petition that the said service is not being counted by the respondents for the purpose of pension after his retirement in the year 2000 from the post of Assistant Director (Prosecution). 3. It is stated in the reply of the respondents that once the petitioner tendered his resignation from his earlier service, he cannot claim benefit of the said service. Moreover, the petitioner failed to place on record any material to show that he submitted application for the post of Sub Inspector (Prosecution) through proper channel or with due permission of his earlier employer. Therefore, the petitioner is not legally entitled to count his services rendered with the Posts and Telegraph Department. 4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a perusal of Annexure-3 dated 11.11.1999, the letter received from the Central Government, clearly reveals that the petitioner has worked as Telephone Operator from 3.7.1961 to 27.8.1969 afternoon. There is no justification for not counting the said services for the purpose of pension and retiral benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his submission, has placed reliance on Rule-25(2) and 25(3) of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996. 5. The submission of learned counsel for the respondents is that the petitioner tendered his resignation from his earlier services, therefore, he cannot claim benefit of the said services. Mr. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his submission, has placed reliance on Rule-25(2) and 25(3) of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996. 5. The submission of learned counsel for the respondents is that the petitioner tendered his resignation from his earlier services, therefore, he cannot claim benefit of the said services. Mr. Baig further submitted that the petitioner has failed to place any material on record to show that he had submitted an application for the post of Sub Inspector (Prosecution) through proper channel or with due permission of his earlier employer. The respondents have taken a preliminary objection that after his retirement in the year 2000, the petitioner filed the writ petition after a period of 8 years belatedly. 6. The petitioner has submitted in rejoinder that he has, for the post of Sub Inspector (Prosecution), applied through proper channel and it is not now possible for the petitioner to obtain such old documents after having duly served with the respondents for such a long period of 30 years. 7. I have gone through the record of the writ petition and further considered the rival submissions of counsel for the parties. 8. Before proceeding further, I would like to quote Rule-25(1), 25(2) and 25(3) of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 which are as follows : "25. Forfeiture of service on resignation (1) Resignation from a service or a post, entails forfeiture of past service. (2) A resignation shall not entail forfeiture of past service if it has been submitted to take up, with proper permission, another appointment, whether temporary or permanent, under the Central Government where service qualifies. (3) Interruption in service in a case falling under sub-rule (2), due to the two appointments being at different stations, not exceeding the joining time admissible under the rules of transfer, shall be covered by grant of leave of any kind due to the Government servant on the date of relief or by formal condonation to the extent to which the period is not covered by leave due to him." 9. On the issue of delay, suffice it to say that the pension is the property of a retired employee and the delay is relevant only for the purpose of not granting the interest for the said period, therefore, the objection of delay is over-ruled. 10. On the issue of delay, suffice it to say that the pension is the property of a retired employee and the delay is relevant only for the purpose of not granting the interest for the said period, therefore, the objection of delay is over-ruled. 10. A bare perusal of Rule 25(2) of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 would reveal that the resignation shall not entail forfeiture of past service if it has been submitted to take up, with proper permission, another appointment whether temporary or permanent where the Govt. where service qualifies and similar is the intention of Rule-25(3) of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996, therefore, the present case is not a case of any interruption and the Rule-25(1) would not apply in the facts and circumstances of present case. 11. As regards asking copy of document of proper permission to apply for the another appointment after 30 years of service in another department is not justified and on the said part, Rule 25(2) of Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 is directive in nature, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for counting his services from 3.7.1961 to 27.8.1969. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to count the services of the petitioner from 3.7.1961 to 27.8.1969 rendered by him with the Central Government for the purpose of his qualifying service for calculating pension and other retiral benefits. The respondents shall also revise his pension and further make payment of revised retiral benefits within a period of two months from today. The petitioner shall be entitled for interest at rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the writ petition.Writ Petition Allowed. *******