Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(JHK) 151
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
SANTOSH NAPIT – Appellant
Versus
POSTS – Respondent
WPC/2873/2013
A casual worker who was given temporary status but was never regularized before superannuation is not entitled to pensionary benefits as per the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the CCS (T.S.) Rules, 1965.
Headnote:
PENSION - TEMPORARY STATUS - ENTITLEMENT - CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 - CCS (T.S.) RULES, 1965 - A casual worker who was given temporary status but was never regularized before superannuation is not entitled to pensionary benefits as per the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the CCS (T.S.) Rules, 1965.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was appointed as a water-man on daily wages in 1965 and worked sincerely. In 1995, the Postmaster General directed the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices to regularize the petitioner's services. Accordingly, the petitioner was made a full-time casual labourer in 1996 and was assigned the duty of a Packer in the night post office at Jharia. In 1998, the petitioner was conferred temporary status with effect from 26.4.1997. The petitioner retired from service on 30.04.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation.
Finding of the Court:
The petitioner was a full-time casual worker on regular scale of pay as Group D; however, he was never regularized. He had neither been screened or medically examined for the purpose of being be regularized so as to grant him some concession. As he was a casual worker, CCS Pension rules do not apply to him. Even CCS (TS) Rules also did not apply to him.
Issues: Whether a casual worker who was given temporary status but was never regularized before superannuation is entitled to pensionary benefits as per the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the CCS (T.S.) Rules, 1965?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to pensionary benefits as per the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the CCS (T.S.) Rules, 1965 because he was never regularized before superannuation.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's application.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 2873 of 2013
Santosh Napit
……… Petitioner
Versus
1.
The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Posts, New
Delhi
2.
The Director of Accounts (P), Department of Posts, Patna (Bihar)
3.
The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna
4.
The Postmaster General, Ranchi
5.
The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Dhanbad Division,
Dhanbad
6.
The Senior Postmaster, Department of Posts, Dhanbad
7.
The Postmaster Head Post Office, Bokaro Steel City, District Bokaro
……… Respondents
--------
CORAM: Hon’ble The Acting Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
--------
For the Petitioner
: Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents
: Ms.Vibha Buxi, Advocate.
--------
14/ 05.01.2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.
The instant writ application has been preferred by the
petitioner praying therein for quashing the order dated 31st January, 2013
passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna,
Circuit Court at Ranchi in O.A. No. 225/2012 (R) whereby the learned
tribunal has dismissed the application of the petitioner and refused to
grant retiral benefits to the petitioner on the ground that he is not entitled
to pension as he was not regularized before his superannuation.
3.
The brief facts of the case as indicated in the writ
application is that the petitioner was appointed as water-man on
11.05.1965 on daily wages and since his appointment as part-time
Waterman worked sincerely and to the best of his ability. The petitioner
made several representations to the concerned authorities for
regularization of his services. The Postmaster General, Ranchi
(Respondent No.4) on 31.01.1995, in course of his visit to Jharia S.O.,
directed Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Dhanbad Division,
Dhanbad (Respondent NO. 5) to do the needful with respect to
regularization of services of the petitioner. Accordingly, the case of the
petitioner was examined in the light of Directorate Letter No. 45-
14/1L/SPB-I dated 16.09.1992, circulated vide C.O. Patna Letter No.
Est/E-34/RS (VII)/Rlg/Ch II dated 06.11.1992 and it was ordered to
make the petitioner fulltime casual labourer.
The S.P.M., Jharia assigned the petitioner the duty of Packer
attached in the night of P.O. at Jharia and fixed his duty hours for six
-2-
hours as waterman and for two hours as Packer w.e.f. 26.04.1996.
Thereafter, the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Dhanbad Division,
Dhanbad (Respondent No. 5) vide Memo No. A-1/C-L/Dig dated
21.06.1996 (Annexure-1) in supersession of all previous orders directed
that petitioner would be paid wages for eight hours duty on pro rata
basis equal to minimum of the scales of Gr. “D” official of the
corresponding cadre w.e.f. 26.04.1996. The Respondent No.5 vide
Memo No. A-1/Casual Labourer/Dlg dated 04.06.1998 (Annexure-2) in
pursuance of Letter No. 45-05/97/S.P.O. I dated 12.04.1991 conveyed
under Chief P.M.G. Patna Letter No. Est/E34/MS/6/Rlg dated 26.4.1991,
conferred temporary status on the petitioner w.e.f. 26.4.1997.
The petitioner worked regularly after being conferred temporary
status and on 30.04.2009 he retired from service on attaining the age of
superannuation which he was informed vide Memo No. C1-14/4/2009
dated 15.04.2009 (Annexure-3).
4.
Mr. S.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that clause 8 of the circular contained in GI, Department of Post,
LR No.45-05/97/S.P.O.I. dated 12.04.1991 (Annexure A to the counter
affidavit) shows that after rendering three years of continuous service
after conferment of temporary status casual laborers would be considered
at par with temporary Group D for the purpose of contribution of GPF.
Department of post has issued circular contained in GI department of
Po
