JUDGMENT :

Few undisputed facts, which are on record, are that the petitioner was appointed as a work-charged (Supervisor) on a temporary basis in the Irrigation Department of the undivided State of Uttar Pradesh and ever since his induction on 29th October 1979, he had continuously discharged his services, and during this tenure of his services in his status as that of work-charged supervisor, he was given all the service benefits of increments, which was added and made admissible to him from time to time, and he was also given leave and other service benefits, as it was being extended to a regular employee.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the 1st increment in the salary of the petitioner, was accorded to him after his induction as a work-charge supervisor on 29th October 1979, though by an order of 9th October 1980, where the pay-scale of the petitioner was made admissible revised and was raised w.e.f. 29th October 1979.

3. As and when the salary of the regular employees of the respondent/department, were increased, with the revision of pay-scale, the petitioner’s counsel contended, that petitioner’s pay-scale too was simultaneously revised from time to time, for example, that the benefit of revision of pay-scale was extended to the petitioner on 30th July 2009 w.e.f. 1st January 1986, and thereafter, on 23rd August 1993 w.e.f. 1st January 1986. However, on completion of 10 years of satisfactory service, on the said post, an additional increment was also sanctioned to be made payable in favour of the petitioner, which was released w.e.f. 29th October 1989. Meaning thereby, during all his tenure of service, all the service benefits, which had accrued as a consequence of the enforcement of the recommendation of the Pay Commission or the Office Memorandum, which was issued and made applicable from time to time, for example, on 15th December 2020, the pay-scale of the petitioner was revised w.e.f. 29th October 1987 also.

4. The petitioner, after his induction into the services, and owing to his service records, he was given a regular status in the services on 21st January 2004, and on completion of three years of service, the services of the petitioner was also confirmed on the said post w.e.f. 21st January 2007, by virtue of an Office Order No. 3438/E-6 (Confirmation) dated 16th November 2007, which was issued by the competent Superintending Engineer of Upper Ganga Canal Modernization Division-1, Roorkee, district Haridwar.

5. The petitioner, being aggrieved against the regularization, and the benefits accruing there from, which was partially extended to him, and due to the late regularization, despite of having continued to serve with the respondents for the last 24 years, a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 36398 of 2007, Ram Nath Singh and Another Vs. State was preferred, where, he was impleaded as petitioner No. 2. But, however, having worked with the said capacity after being placed, under the work-charge establishment, the petitioner contends, that even after his regularization of services, till the date he attained his age of superannuation, he had not been paid with the gratuity amount for the period of regular services, which had been rendered by him, rather the respondents have paid him the gratuity amount w.e.f. 1979, till his services were regularized i.e. w.e.f. on 21st January 2004.

6. The second limb of grievance of the petitioner is that all his retiral dues, which would be otherwise admissible to be made payable to the him after attaining of his age of superannuation on 31st January 2009, it ought to have been determined to be made payable to him from the date of his initial induction into the services i.e. on 29th October 1979, when he was brought into a work-charge establishment as a supervisor; with the Irrigation Department.

7. The act of the respondents of non-inclusion of the period of services from 29th October 1979, till his services were regularized on 21st January 2004, for the purpos