The entitlement to pension is based on the conditions laid down in the Scheme, and the court cannot rewrite the service condition of an employee.

JUDGMENT

amrita Sinha, J. - The petitioners are retired primary school teachers. They are aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Secretary, School Education

Department on 3rd august, 2017 rejecting their prayer for grant of pension in on the ground that they did not complete the qualifying service period of ten years and the relaxation clause cannot be made applicable in their case.

It has been submitted that the petitioners joined their service immediately upon receiving their letters of appointment. Due to the delay on the part of the respondents in issuing their appointment letters, the petitioners lost valuable years in their service career and as such there has been a shortfall in the qualifying service period.

Death cum Retirement Benefit Scheme, 1981 lays down the conditions upon compliance of which a retired teacher becomes entitled to receive pension. The Scheme mentions that subject to satisfactory service an employee shall be entitled to pension provided the employee concerned had completed at least ten years of service on attaining the age of superannuation.

In the present case none of the eight petitioners completed ten years of qualifying service.

The petitioner no. 1 has served for five years and six months, petitioner no. 2 served for seven years, petitioner no. 3 served for eight years and ten months, petitioner no. 4 served for eight years, petitioner no. 5 served for nine years and two months, petitioner no. 6 served for nine years, petitioner no. 7 served for five years and six months and petitioner no. 8 served for eight years.

The Government, by a Memo dated 2nd February, 2009, modified the Scheme of 1981 and laid down that fraction of a year equal to three months and above shall be treated as completed six monthly period of service and reckoned as qualifying service for determining retirement benefit and the period of service below three months will be ignored. The aforesaid implies that, if at all, a shortfall of maximum six months in service may be condoned by the Government.

The petitioners rely upon a judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. -vs- ali Hussain ansari & anr. reported in (2020) 3 SCC 99 wherein the Court directed payment of lump sum compensation to the employee even though there was a shortfall in his qualifying service period.

The petitioners herein pray for similar relief.

It has been submitted that as the petitioners were not responsible for the delay in issuance of appointment letters and the process of appointment got delayed due to several litigations, accordingly, they should be given notional benefit for the period they could not work on account of non-issuance of the letter of appointment.

It appears from the documents annexed to the writ petition that the selection process for appointment of primary teachers commenced in the year 2000. The process of selection could not be concluded in view of pending litigations. appointment letters were ultimately issued in favour of the petitioners in the years 2010/2011. The petitioners accepted their letters of appointment without raising any objection. The age of superannuation being known to the petitioners they were well aware that they would not attain the qualifying service period for receiving pension. The date of superannuation being pre-fixed, the petitioners knew that they would not be entitled to pension in terms of the Scheme of 1981. It is not the case of the petitioners that they were discriminated or the letters of appointment were deliberately issued at a delayed date. On the contrary, it is the stand of the petitioners that the selection process could not be concluded in view of pending litigations.

It is common knowledge that whenever a recruitment process is initiated, due to some reason or the other, the process takes considerable period of time to reach a conclusion. Vacancies being limited the intending participants, mostly the educated unemployed youth, thr