R. Banumathi, J.

This LPA is preferred against the order passed in W.P(S) NO.6514/2005, by which the writ court directed the State of Jharkhand to consider the payment of pension along with other retiral dues to the respondents by taking into account the date of initial appointment and the temporary service rendered by the writ petitioner, Ajamber Ahir.

2. It is the case of the writ petitioner-1st respondent that he was appointed as Choukidar on 3.1.1958 in the temporary beat no.3/1 in the Tamar Circle, District Ranchi, and since then he served the Government as a temporary employee on a lower salary. After repeated demands, the Government vide letter dated 5.5.1992 declared Choukidars as Class IV employee with effect from 1.1.1990 in the scale of pay of Rs.750-12-870-14-940/- in the regular post and the said decision was entered in the service book of the writ petitioner-1st respondent. The petitioner-respondent retired from service on 31.12.1997. Even though the 1st respondent was regularized with effect from 1.1.1990, the 1st respondent served the Government since his appointment on 3.1.1958 and the 1st respondent retired from service on completion of 40 years of his service as Choukidar Class IV Government employee, he was not paid pension.

3. The case of the writ petitioner-1st respondent is that he served the Government for 40 years and in view of the 1st respondent’s 40 years of service he was entitled to pension, gratuity and benefits of revised pay with time bound scale, besides other benefits, group insurance, leave encashment and provident fund. Stating that his representation has not been disposed of and service benefits are not paid, the 1st respondent filed W.P(S) NO.6514/2005 for issuance of direction to the respondents (appellants herein) to make payment of the service benefits to the 1st respondent who served as Class IV employee-Choukidar.

4. The State of Jharkhand filed counter contending that the service of Choukidar were regularized with effect from 1.1.1990 and Choukidar of the State would be entitled to get pension only after completion of 10 years of service with effect from 1.1.1990, i.e. date of declaration as Government servant. The writ petitioner-1st respondent became Government Servant on 1.1.1990 and superannuated on 13.12.1997 and therefore, completed only 8 years of service and the 1st respondent does not have the qualifying pensionable service and he is not entitled to get pension.

5. Observing that as per Rule 63 of Bihar Pension Rules, regularization will relate back to the date of initial appointment and the temporary service has to be taken into account for calculating the pension and other service benefits, learned Single Judge directed the respondent State of Jharkhand to consider payment of pension along with other retiral dues to the writ petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of that order.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that Rule 63 of the Bihar Pension Rules applies only in a case where a person is appointed, though temporarily on a substantive or officiating post as a Government servant. It was further submitted that the respondent- writ petitioner became the Government servant only with effect from 1.1.1990 and retired on 31.12.1997 and thus his substantive service comes to eight years and since the respondent did not complete the qualifying service of 10 years, the respondent is not entitled to pension and the learned Single Judge erred in directing the appellant to take into account the past service rendered by the appellant as temporary employee.

7. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that in January, 1958, the respondent was engaged as Chowkidar and worked for more than thirty years from the date of engagement and in the year 1992, Government of Bihar took a decision to treat all Chowkidars and Wafadars as Class IV Government employees. It was