Back
A. S. SUPEHIA, MAUNA M. BHATT
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
RUPAL DINESH PATEL – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 04.01.2024 in Special Civil Application No. 15235 of 2021, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the petition directing the appellants to pay to the respondent compensation pension and other corresponding retirement benefits based on the qualifying services put in by her within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. It is further directed that the appellant shall also pay the arrears of pension and other retirement benefits to the respondent from the date of her discharge within the period directed.
2. The facts in brief emanating from the record are as under:
Ad-hoc service can qualify for pension benefits under the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002, if the service is continuous and in a sanctioned post.
Ad hoc services can be considered as qualifying service for pensionary benefits under Rule 25 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002.
Ad hoc service can qualify for family pension if the employee has completed over five years of service, as per the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002.
Once it is settled that the ad hoc service, which has been made basis of regularization, has been considered in catena of judgments and it has been held that the same is countable for reckoning the q....
Temporary services, including interrupted periods, are eligible for pensionary benefits under Rule 25 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002.
petitioner has rendered qualifying pensionery service with effect from the date of his initial joining in the department in question, so the same shall be treated as service qualifying for pension an....
Ad hoc services should be counted for calculating qualifying service for pension and gratuity as per the Uttar Pradesh Palika (Centralised) Services Retirement Benefit Rules, 1981.
The delay in appointment due to the inaction of the respondents should not deprive an employee of the benefit of adhoc service as qualifying service for pensionary benefits under Rule 3.17-A(a) of th....
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
