Surinderpal Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Singla, Advocate ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the respondent-Board to count the ad hoc service rendered by him w.e.f. 05.08.1977 to 09.01.1990 towards the ‘qualifying service’ for the purposes of grant of pension and other retiral dues. CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). The undisputed facts are that the petitioner joined the Punjab School Education Board (in short, ‘the Board’) as a Manager on 05.08.1977 pursuant to the appointment letter of even date (Annexure R1) on the following terms and conditions:- “1. You are hereby offered a purely temporary post of Manager on ad hoc basis for a period of three months in the Punjab School Education Board in the pay scale of Rs.300-25-600 plus usual allowances and benefits admissible to the other employees of the Board, from time to time.

2. Your services are liable to termination without notice even before the expiry of this period, without assigning any reason. Should you resign your post before the expiry of this period, you will have to give one month’s clear notice or forfeit in lieu thereof your salary including allowances, for one month or for the period by which the notice falls short of one month.

3. Before joining, you should bring with you all the certificates regarding qualification, date of birth and having passed Punjabi upto Matric standard.

4. You will, before reporting for duty in the Board, be required to furnish a Medical Certificate of fitness from the Medical Office Punjab School Education Board Kothi No.119, Sector 15-B, Chandigarh after depositing a medical fee of Rs.12/- with the Cashier, Punjab School Education Board.” (3). The petitioner’s services were thereafter terminated on 07.05.1980 but he was again appointed on the same terms and conditions vide appointment letter dated 01.09.1981 (Annexure CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 3 – P2). The petitioner continued to serve as such till his services were regularized w.e.f. 09.01.1990. The petitioner has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 30.11.2008. (4). The solitary question that arises for consideration is as to whether or not the service rendered by the petitioner from 05.08.1977 to 09.01.1990 deserves to be counted for the purposes retiral dues? (5). There is no dispute that the petitioner’s claim for retiral dues is governed by the Punjab Civil Services Rules as adopted by the respondent- Board, Rule 4.23 CSR Vol-II whereof reads as follows:- “4.23 Interruption in service (either between two spells of permanent or temporary service or between a spell of temporary service and permanent service or vice versa), may be condoned, subject to the following conditions, namely:- (1) The interruption should have been caused by reasons beyond the control of Government employee concerned. (2) Service preceding the interruption should not be less than five years’ duration. In cases where there are two or more interruptions, the total service, pensionary benefits in respect of which shall be lost if the interruptions are not condoned should not be less than five years. CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 4 – (3) The interruption should not be of more than one year’s duration. In cases where there are two or more interruptions, the total period of all interruptions to be condoned should not exceed one year. The period of interruption condoned shall not count as qualifying service Vide Rule 4.23 of Pb.CSR Vol.II read with Pb. Finance Deptt. Notification No.3-2(13) FCD- 81/13934 dt. 26.9.85 In interruption between two spells of service rendered under the State Govt. shall be treated as automatically condoned except where the interruption has been caused resignation, dismissal or removal from the period of interruption itself shall under no circumstances be reckoned (counted) as qualifying for pension.” (Emphasis applied) (6). The above-reproduced Rule leaves no room to doubt that the interruption between two spells of ‘permanent’ or ‘temporary’ services, if caused by reasons beyond the control of a Government employee, shall be treated as automatically condoned. That being so, Rule 3.17 of the CSR Vol-II, which entitles counting of uninterrupted ‘temporary’ or officiating service towards ‘qualifying service’ for the purpose of pension, would also come to the aid of the petitioner. The said Rule reads as follows:- CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 5 –

3.17 “If an employee was hold substantively a permanent post on the date of his retirement, his temporary or officiating service under the State Government, followed without interruption by confirmation in the same or another post, shall count in full as qualifying service except in respect of:- i. periods of temporary or officiating service non-pensionable establishment; ii. periods of service in work-charged establishment; and iii. periods of service paid from contingencies.” Note 1 – xxx Note 2 – xxx xxx xxx xxx (7). On a conjoint reading of Rules 3.17 and 4.23 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Volume-II it becomes amply clear that the service rendered on ‘temporary’ basis against a regular/substantive post followed by appointment on regular basis, if interrupted for a reason not attributable to the Government employee and/or is not caused due to his resignation, dismissal or removal, such service has to be added towards the ‘qualifying service’ along with the regular service rendered by the CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 6 – employee while determining his pension and other retiral dues. (8). Applying the above interpretation to the facts of the case in hand, the ‘temporary’ service rendered by the petitioner from 05.08.1977 to 07.05.1980 can be overlooked as the break in service was caused due to termination of his services w.e.f.

07.05.1980. However, after his fresh appointment as a Manager on temporary basis w.e.f.

01.09.1981, the petitioner uninterruptedly served as such till he was brought on regular establishment w.e.f. 09.01.1990. The entire service rendered by the petitioner from 01.09.1981 onwards till he retired on attaining the age of superannuation, thus, deserves to be counted towards the ‘qualifying service’ for the retiral benefits. (9). For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed in part and the respondent-Board is directed to re-determine the petitioner’s retiral dues including pension after re-calculating his ‘qualifying service’ in the light of the above-given directions and release the same within a period of CWP No.17921 of 2009.doc - 7 – four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (10). Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

06.12.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE