Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 219 (CAL)

Khairul Alam v. Chaitali

2012-03-16

NISHITA MHATRE, TARUN KUMAR GUPTA

body2012
Judgment 1. THIS writ petition has been preferred by the wife of a deceased employee, who was working as a tahsil peon. She has claimed family pension on the death of her husband on March 12, 1985. The State has not paid any amount as her deceased husband had not completed the qualifying service prior to his death. 2. MR. Khairul Alam, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, has brought to our notice the statements showing that the petitioner had contributed to the provident fund from the year 1981. Therefore, according to him, since it was a contributory provident fund, it must be presumed that the employee was a government servant and the petitioner is entitled to family pension. The learned advocate has placed reliance on certain notifications in support of his contention that although the petitioners husband was working as a tahsil peon before he was absorbed in service by the State of West Bengal as a temporary employee, the services rendered by the employee should be treated as regular service and must be included for the purposes of qualifying service. The qualifying service has been defined in rule 17 of the West Bengal Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971. It means the service, which commences from the date a government servant takes charge of the office to which he is first appointed either substantively or in an officiating or temporary capacity. The issue before us is whether the petitioners husband could be considered to be in government service prior to his absorption in 1984. Undisputedly, the employee was working as a tahsil peon. Rule 19 of the West Bengal Land Management Manual, 1977 provides that each Tahsildar should have a tahsil peon throughout the year. A tahsil peon is entitled to fixed monthly remuneration without any dearness allowance or medical allowance. A tahsil peon is, also, entitled to payment of commission at the rate of 0.5 per cent separately on the collection of land revenue and cesses and loans by the tahsildar to whom he is attached subject to a minimum collection of Rs.8,000/-. 3. A tahsildar is a part time government servant and is appointed by the Sub-Divisional Officer. This has been provided in Rule 14 of the West Bengal Land Management Manual. 4. 3. A tahsildar is a part time government servant and is appointed by the Sub-Divisional Officer. This has been provided in Rule 14 of the West Bengal Land Management Manual. 4. IN our opinion, therefore, when the tahsildar is a part time government servant, the question of a tahsil peon being appointed as a whole time government servant does not arise. This is because the tahsil peon is attached to each tahsildar and unless the tahsildar is working as a whole time employee, the tahsil peon cannot be considered as a whole time employee, though he may work throughout the year. The learned advocate for the petitioner has relied on a Memo dated June 24, 1983 to submit that the group-D employees, such as, the petitioners husband, are entitled to salary in a time scale and, therefore, he must be considered as a whole time employee working throughout the year. This submission is, again, in our opinion, incorrect. Rule 19 of the West Bengal Land Management Manual, 1977 indicates that the tahsil peon is to be paid a fixed monthly remuneration without dearness allowance or medical allowance. Therefore, the question of emoluments being paid in a time scale does not arise. 5. AN employee, who has been employed on part time basis and throughout the year, is entitled to fixed wages not exceeding Rs.60/- per month without any allowance. The pay has been revised by the notification dated June 28, 1990. However, this notification would not apply at all to the petitioners case. 6. THE learned advocate for the petitioner, then, tried to submit that, the concept of an employee being paid pension from the date he enters service is well recognised, by placing reliance on the memo issued on May 20, 1981 by the Government of West Bengal. This submission is again fallacious. THE memorandum talks about the clubbing of service rendered by a temporary employee in a State Government with the permanent services rendered under the Government of India. In our opinion, this memo has no application whatsoever to the case before us. We have perused the rules in the West Bengal Land Management Manual, 1977 and we are certain that the tahsil peon is not entitled to pension for the services rendered by him as a tahsil peon. In our opinion, this memo has no application whatsoever to the case before us. We have perused the rules in the West Bengal Land Management Manual, 1977 and we are certain that the tahsil peon is not entitled to pension for the services rendered by him as a tahsil peon. The petitioners case may be an unfortunate one, since her husband died within one year of his absorption in regular service as a temporary employee on September 29, 1984. There can be no dispute that the qualifying service for the payment of pension is a period of more than one year. Moreover, while considering whether the family pension can be paid to the petitioner, we have noted the rules pertaining to family pension and these rules do not make any exception for an employee, who dies in harness. 7. ON July 27, 1981, the rules were amended. The period of three years for admissibility of family pension in the case of death of an employee is reduced to one year of service. However, in the present case, the petitioners husband had not put in one year of service. He was absorbed by the order dated September 29, 1984 and he expired on March 12, 1985. He, thus, worked for leas than one year as a temporary employee in the post of ex-peon/office peon/night guard. 8. IN these circumstances, we find no reason to differ with the order passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal. The writ application, thus, stands dismissed without, however, any order as to costs.