Past Panchayat Samiti service must be counted for retiral benefits regardless of absorption department; parity mandated for similarly situated employees under Article 14; in rem judgments obligate State to extend benefits proactively, barring laches exception.

JUDGMENT :

JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.

1. Original petitioner-Sh. Rameshwar Singh was appointed as Panchayat Secretary on 23.08.1979 in Panchayat Samiti Rait, District Kangra. Services of the Panchayat Secretaries of Panchayat Samitis including that of the petitioner were taken over by the respondent-State vide office memorandum dated 15.06.1984 in the Panchayati Raj Department. Petitioner was absorbed in the Panchayati Raj Department. Later, the posts of Panchayat Secretaries were merged in the Rural Development Department and re-designated as Gram Panchayat Adhikari vide notification dated 15.10.1989. Accordingly, the petitioner also became an employee of the Rural Development Department. He was promoted in the year 2008 as Social Education and Block Planning Officer. Petitioner retired on 31.01.2011 on attaining the age of superannuation. Petitioner’s grievance is that he had rendered 31 years, 07 months and 08 days of service with the respondents, whereas, the respondents had granted him retiral benefits only for 27 years of service. The remaining service was not counted by the respondents. Petitioner seeks retiral benefits, viz. Gratuity, Leave Encashment as also Pension on the basis of 31 years, 07 months and 08 days of service rendered by him with the respondents.

During the pendency of this writ petition, the original petitioner-Sh. Rameshwar Singh died on 06.08.2023. His legal representatives were brought on record vide order dated 08.11.2023 passed in CMP(M) No.1532 of 2023.

2. The above relief has been claimed by the petitioner on the strength of the decision rendered in State of Himachal Pradesh & others vs. Basheshar Lal, CWP No. 1802 of 2002, decided on 31.07.2008. In the said case, the petitioners were not being given the benefit of past service rendered by them in the Panchayat Samitis on the ground that such past services though had been considered for the grant of retiral benefits after absorption of the incumbents in the Rural Development Department, but the incumbents, who had been absorbed in the Panchayati Raj Department, their services as Panchayat Secretaries had not been taken into consideration. The ground was rejected by the Hon’ble Division Bench in Basheshar Lal, CWP No.1802 of 2002, decided on 31.07.2008 as under:-

“In the reply filed by the State Government, they took up the plea that the applicant had not rendered qualifying service of 10 years. They also pleaded that the benefit of past service rendered in the Panchayat Samitis had been given to the persons absorbed in the Rural Development Department but these have not been granted to the applicant and similarly placed persons since they were absorbed in the Panchayat Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh.

xxx xxx xxx

The only ground taken by the State of Himachal Pradesh was that since the petitioners were absorbed in the Panchayat Department of Government of Himachal Pradesh while others were absorbed in the Rural Development Department, therefore, the past services rendered have been considered by the Rural Development Department and not the past services rendered by the petitioner and others who have been absorbed in the Panchayat Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh.

The learned Tribunal had considered this plea and had observed that the past services rendered in the Panchayat Samitis have been considered by one wing of the State of Himachal Pradesh i.e. Rural Development Department while the another wing had denied this benefit of past services rendered by the Panchayat Secretaries though both these departments are part of the Government and surprisingly headed by