Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 182 (MP)

Mangla Mandloi v. State of M. P.

2018-02-14

S.C.SHARMA

body2018
ORDER : 1. The petitioner before this Court is a Assistant Teacher and as stated in the writ petition was initially appointed in Forest Department on 10.01.1985 and after completion of 13 years of service in Forest Department by virtue of her selection has joined as a Assistant Teacher in Education Department on 01.04.1998. 2. The petitioner's sole grievance before this Court is that the respondents have not clubbed her services rendered with the Forest Department which is again a department of Madhya Pradesh and therefore, deprived the petitioner from consequential benefits, which is bound to result in receiving less pension. 3. A detailed and exhaustive reply has been filed in the matter and the stand of the respondent is that the petitioner have filed present petition after lapse of 32 years. However, the respondents have admitted that the petitioner has served the Forest Department from the year 1985 to 1998. Respondents have also stated that the petitioner has not applied through proper channel and therefore, her resignation was not accepted by the Forest Department and therefore, question of clubbing her past services does not arise. 4. Resignation of the petitioner is also on record. The petitioner's resignation was accepted by respondents and the same is annexed with the petition as Annex.-P/3. The certificate is on record which reflects that the respondents have accepted the resignation of the petitioner though the respondents in return have stated that letter does not bear any seal nor any dispatch number and has got no legal sanctity. 5. Undisputedly, the petitioner has served the Forest Department of State Government and by virtue of her selection to some other important post, the petitioner has tendered her technical resignation. The petitioner was working on the post of Development Assistant and was certainly not aware of the provisions as contained under the M.P. Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976, which provide for clubbing of the past services. Her resignation might not be happily worded but the fact remains that she has resigned on selection to the post of Assistant Teacher. 6. The petitioner's contention is that the respondents while granting pensionary benefits have wiped out the entire service rendered by her w.e.f. 10.01.1985 to 31.03.1998. The record reveals that the petitioner after resigning on 31.03.1998 has joined as Assistant Teacher on 01.04.1998, meaning thereby, her services under the government is almost continuing services. 7. 6. The petitioner's contention is that the respondents while granting pensionary benefits have wiped out the entire service rendered by her w.e.f. 10.01.1985 to 31.03.1998. The record reveals that the petitioner after resigning on 31.03.1998 has joined as Assistant Teacher on 01.04.1998, meaning thereby, her services under the government is almost continuing services. 7. This Court has considered the issue of clubbing the past service earlier rendered by the Radheshyam Sharma in Writ Petition No. 1973/2017, Radheshyam Sharma vs. State of M.P. and Others and in the aforesaid case, this Court on 15.01.2018 has held as under:- "The fact before this Court does establish that the petitioner earlier was in the government service and later on, with due permission from the department applied in another department for another post and he has joined another department and, therefore, by virtue of Pension Rules, he is entitled for pension by taking into account his past services rendered with the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Madhya Pradesh. Resultantly, the writ petition stands allowed and impugned order passed by the respondent dated 30.01.2017 is hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled for benefit of past services in the matter of grant of pension as well as terminal dues. The qualifying service as defined under Rule 3 (P) of the Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976, means the period between the date of joining the pensionable service with the State Government and the date of retirement therefrom. The petitioner was certainly an employee of the State Government by virtue of the order dated 24.04.1980 and has attained the age of superannuation on 24.06.2016, hence, the entire period be taken into account for grant of all terminal dues. Resultantly writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pass necessary order for grant of terminal dues and to revise PPO and to grant arrears within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid, writ petition stands allowed." 8. In light of the aforesaid judgment, the writ petition stands allowed. The respondents are directed to count the services of the petitioner rendered with the Forest Department for the purposes of payment of pensionary dues only. The respondents shall pass appropriate order and shall make consequential payment within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 9. The respondents are directed to count the services of the petitioner rendered with the Forest Department for the purposes of payment of pensionary dues only. The respondents shall pass appropriate order and shall make consequential payment within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 9. With the aforesaid, writ petition stands allowed. 10. Certified Copy as per rules.