JUDGMENT 1. - The instant special appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.11.2013 passed by learned Single Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No.5549/2012 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner in which a prayer was made for calculating the services rendered by the petitioner appellant in Panchayat Samiti Desuri as qualifying service for pensionary benefits and to re-compute his retrial benefits including pension. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the petitioner appellant was initially appointed as Teacher vide order dated 17.11.1981 issued by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Desuri and the said order for appointment was purely on temporary basis till regularly selected teachers are made available. The petitioner worked as Teacher on temporary basis till 20.10.1983 and while sering as Teacher in the Panchayat Samiti, Desuri, the petitioner appellant participated in the recruitment process for appointment for the post of School Lecturer in the Education Department initiated by the Raj. Public Service Commission, he was selected as School Lecturer and appointed in the Education Department on 21.10.1983. The petitioner appellant was superannuated from service while working as Principal on 31.10.2011 from the Education Department but at the time of finalising his pension case and retrial benefits, the respondents did not count the period for which the petitioner appellant worked as Teacher on temporary basis under the Panchayat Samiti, Desuri. 3. As per counsel for the appellant, there is specific provision in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short, the Rules of 1996) to calculate the service period of an employee irrespective of the appointment either substantively or in an officiating for temporary capacity under Rule 12 of the Rules of 1996 but the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition erroneously on the ground that the appointment of the petitioner appellant in the Panchayat Samiti Desuri from 17.11.1981 to 20.10.1983 was purely on temporary basis till availability of the regularly selected teachers, therefore, the said appointment is covered under Rule 8 of the Rules of 1996, whereas Rule 8 of the Rules of 1996 will not apply in this case because qualifying service is to be calculated as per Chapter-II of the rules of 1996 in which there is specific provision under Rule 12 of the Rules of 1996 in which the provision for commencement of qualifying period is provided. On the basis of above grounds, it is submitted that the judgment rendered by learned single Judge may be quashed and the respondents may kindly be directed to calculate the service period of the petitioner as qualifying service in which he worked as Teacher on temporary basis from 17.11.1981 to 20.10.1983. It is also submitted that in such period, the petitioner was allowed the pay-scale of Rs. 355-570/- by the Panchayat Samiti, Desuri and PF was also deducted from the salary of the petitioner appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant invited our attention towards the judgment of this Court rendered by learned Single Judge of this Court in case of Guman Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors., reported in 1998 (2) RLW p. 1067 , which is completely ignored by learned Single Judge, therefore, submits that the order impugned dated 11.11.2013 passed by learned Single Judge may be quashed and the respondents may kindly be directed to calculate the period of service from 17.11.1981 to 20.10.1983 as qualifying service for pension and retrial benefits and revise the retrial benefits and pension accordingly. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent department vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that the learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner appellant for not calculating the aforesaid service period while following Rule 8 of the Rules of 1996 because in that period appointment was purely on temporary basis, therefore, there is no force in this special appeal. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have perused Rule 12 of the Rules of 1996, which reads as under:- "12. Commencement of qualifying service (a) Except for compensation gratuity, a Government servants' service does not qualify till he has completed eighteen years of age. (b) Subject to the provisions of these rules, the qualifying service of a Government servant shall commence from the date he takes over charge of the post to which he is first appointed, either substantively or in an officiating or temporary capacity." 7. The aforesaid rule was specifically incorporated for the purpose of qualifying service. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointment on temporary basis in the pay-scale of Rs. 355- 570/-, which is evident from the appointment order dated 17.11.1983 whereby the petitioner was appointed as Teacher and worked upto 20.10.1983. The aforesaid rule was specifically incorporated for the purpose of qualifying service. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointment on temporary basis in the pay-scale of Rs. 355- 570/-, which is evident from the appointment order dated 17.11.1983 whereby the petitioner was appointed as Teacher and worked upto 20.10.1983. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is very much entitled for calculating the service period commencing from 17.11.1981 to 20.10.1983 because in that period, the petitioner-appellant was appointed as Teacher on temporary basis till regularly selected candidates are made available but learned single Judge did not consider the case of the petitioner-appellant under Rule 12 of the Rules of 1996. In that Rule, it is expressly provided that the qualifying service of a Government servant shall commence from the date he takes over charge of the post to which he is first appointed either substantively or in an officiating or temporary capacity, therefore, it can be said safely that learned Single Judge has committed an error of law in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner.In view of above, this special appeal is allowed. Accordingly, the order impugned dated 11.11.2013 passed by learned Single Judge is hereby quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to calculate the service period of the petitioner appellant in which he worked as Teacher on temporary basis strictly in accordance with Rule 12 of the Rules of 1996 and order may be passed within a period of three month for revising the retrial benefits and pension of the petitioner appellant.Special appeal allowed. *******