Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
Kanubhai Bhailalbhai Raval & Others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Gujarat & Others - Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 13381 of 2020 With Civil Application (For Fixing Date of Hearing) No. 1 of 2022
Decided On : 19-10-2022
Pensionary Benefits - Government Resolution - 17.10.1988 - The court discussed the issue of counting entire length of service for pensionary benefits as per the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The court held that the respondent authorities were directed to fix the pension of the petitioners by counting their services from the dates of their initial joining till the dates of retirement. All retirement benefits, including leave encashment benefits, were to be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. If the amounts were not paid within the stipulated time, they would carry interest at 6% from the date of filing of the petitions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to declare the action of the respondents in not making full payment of pensionary benefits by counting their entire length of service from the date of joining till the date of retirement as illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent authorities were directed to fix the pension of the petitioners by counting their services from the dates of their initial joining till the dates of retirement. All retirement benefits, including leave encashment benefits, were to be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. If the amounts were not paid within the stipulated time, they would carry interest at 6% from the date of filing of the petitions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the respondent authorities were justified in ignoring the initial 10 years of service prior to the petitioners being conferred the status of permanent employees.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent authorities were misdirected in misinterpreting the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 by counting only the service of the petitioners after they became permanent employees for the fixation of their pension. The court also noted that the issue was confirmed up to the Apex Court, as observed by the Division Bench in a related case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitions and directed the respondent authorities to fix the pension of the petitioners by counting their services from the dates of their initial joining till the dates of retirement. All retirement benefits, including the leave encashment benefits, were to be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. If the amounts were not paid within the stipulated time, they would carry interest at 6% from the date of filing of the petitions.
JUDGMENT :
1. Mr. V.K. Joshi learned advocate for the applicant in Civil Application, would invite this Court’s attention to an order passed in identical matter. In that view, the main matter is taken up for final hearing today. Thus, Civil Application for fixing date of hearing of the main matter stands allowed.
2. So far as main petition is concerned, RULE, returnable forthwith. Mr. Kurven Desai learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.
3. With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.
4. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the prayer in the petition is to declare the action on the part of the respondents in not making full payment of pensionary benefits to the petitioners by counting their entire length of service from the date of joining till date of retirement.
5. Facts in brief would indicate that petitioners have been in service as Rojamdars for a period of 25 years. They have been extended the benefit of the resolution dated 17.10.1988 on completion of 10 years of service. For the purposes of pension, the date has been taken as the date on which they completed 10 years of service.
6. This issue involved is covered by the decision of the coordinate bench of this Court dated 03.08.2021 rendered in Special Civil Application No.23242 of 2019 and allied matter. The said decision reads as under :
(2) Learned advocate Mr. V.K. Joshi appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that all the petitioners have rendered services ranging from 20 to 44 years of service. Petitioner No.44 has rendered 20 years of service from 09.08.1974 to 28.02.1995.
(3) The respondents have accordingly fixed their pension as per the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, by deducting the initial 10 years of service, which is under challenge.
(4) Learned advocate Mr. V.K. Joshi appearing on behalf of the petitioners has at the out set has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by catena of decisions of this Court. He has placed reliance on the order dated 21.08.2019 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.11086 of 2019, wherein the Court has considered various decisions of the Division Bench as well as learned Single Judge for granting the same reliefs.
(5) Learned advocate Mr. Alkesh Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent authorities, while placing reliance on the affidavit, has submitted that the petitioners are fixed and paid the pension as per Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. He has submitted that the resolution is very clear that for the purpose of pension the service of an employee, after he becomes permanent, is required to be considered. He has thus, submitted that the resolution itself provides that after completion of 10 years of service, the pension is required to be fixed and accordingly it was fixed in case of all the petitioners. Thus, he has submitted that no interference is required.
(6) I have considered the rival submissions. The only issue which requires consideration is whether the respondent authorities are justified in ignoring the initial 10 years of service prior to they are conferred the status of permanent employees.
(7) The Coordinate Bench in the order dated 21.08.2019 passed in Special Civil Application No.11086 of 2019, after considering the various judgments, including the Division Bench judgement, rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.764 of 2019 in the case of Sardarbhai Panabhai Chauhan vs. State of Gujarat and in the case of Executive Engineer, Panchayat vs. Samudabhai Jyotibha
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of employees to have their past services counted for pensionary benefits, as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that past services of daily wagers, when fulfilling the conditions of Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, qualify for pension, and the enti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that past services of daily wagers, when they completed 240 days continuous service as per section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, qualify for ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entire length of service from the date of initial appointment should be considered for the purposes of fixation of pensionary benefits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the benefits of pension to daily wagers should be calculated from the date of their initial appointments, as per the Government Resolution dat....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the continuous service of daily wagers from the date of their initial appointments should be counted for the purpose of pension, as clarified ....
Service prior to regularization should be considered for pension calculation, as clarified by the Government circular.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
