The right to pension cannot be denied on the basis of temporary status when long-term service and statutory provisions merit entitlement.

ORDER (Oral)

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

By way of the present OA, the applicant seeks the following relief:

“a. To issue order or direction to the respondents quashing the impugned order dated 20-09-2021 by which the respondents have denied the benefit of Pension and other allowances due to her Late husband from 31.07.2014 to 16.08.2016 and benefit of family pension to her after the death of her late husband and payment of salary due to her husband’s three hundred days earned leave encashment in in consequence of more then 36 years long services of her late husband Late Tara Dutt Joshi, after calling the entire records from the respondents and declare the same unconstitutional, arbitrary and a nullity or pass any other order direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances stated in the body of the original Application.

b. To issue order or direction to the respondents to directed the respondents to grant the post retiral benefits in consequence to the services of her late husband i.e pension, and 300 days leave encashment and family pension to the petitioner holding the impugned orders are passed in utter disregard to the procedure defines in the rules, in view of the facts highlighted in the body of the original application had it been the impugned order is not in existence or pass any other order direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances stated in the body of the original application.

c. To award damages to the Applicant in tune of Rs. 5 Lakhs on account of arbitrary and malicious act of the respondents and direct to recover the same from the erring officers.

d. Any other relief which the court deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. We take note of the fact that the present case is contested by the legal heirs of the applicant. The amended Memo of Parties is already placed on record.

2.1 Highlighting the facts of the case from the OA, learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has impugned the office order dated 20.09.2021.

2.2 He submits that the applicant is the widow of Late Sri Tara Dutt Joshi, R/o Village Dhingtar, P.O. Kukrouli, Tehsil Didihat, District Pithoragarh, Uttarakhand, who was appointed as Choukidar in the respondent department on 01- 05-1978 at Sub-Post Office, Thal, Pithoragarh.

2.3 After completion of more than 35 years continuous unblemished service period the services of the husband of the applicant was superannuated on 31.07.2014 after completing the age of 60 years.

2.4 On 20.12.2014, the husband of the petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondents through his counsel and asked to pay the payment of gratuity. Respondent No. 2 replied the same and denied on the ground that the gratuity is not paid to the casual labour as the respondent was working as casual labour who was granted the status of temporary status chaukidar.

2.5 Thereafter, the husband of the applicant preferred an application before the patrolling authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Bareilly for seeking direction to the respondent to make the payment of gratuity.

2.6 On 29.03.2016 the Learned Controlling Authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Bareilly passed an order on the application filed by the husband of the petitioner and held that the husband of applicant is entitled for the benefit of the gratuity Rs. 5,10,445/- (Rupees Five Lack Ten Thousand Four Hundred Forty Five Only) with 10% interest.

2.7 Being aggrieved by the order dated 29.03.2016 the respondents challenged preferring an Appeal before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Dehradun.

2.8 Thereafter the husband of the petitioner died on 16.08.2016.

2.9 The Appellat