IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
104
CWP-153 of 2018 (O&M)
Date of Order:18.02.2021
RISHI RAJ AND ANR.
..Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL Present: Mr. Kuldeep Khandelwal , Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Samarth Sagar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J(Oral) The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.
Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the claim of the petitioner for counting the services rendered by them as part time employee is to be considered as a qualifying service for the grant of pensionary benefits in view of the judgment in Jai Bhagwan vs. State of Haryana and others(Civil Writ Petition No.1048 of 2016, decided on 01.03.2019).
Mr. Samarth Sagar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, however, states that the Letters Patent Appeal against the aforesaid judgment is pending.
Be that as it may. Once a Co-ordinate Bench has already held that such service is required to be treated as a qualifying service for the grant of pensionary benefits, this Court does not find any ground to take a different view.
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 19-02-2021 20:19:31 :::
CWP-153 of 2018 (O&M) -2-
The aforesaid judgment is also with respect to the employees, who were working in the Department of Education, Haryana.
Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the decision in Jai Bhagwan's case (supra).
February 18, 2021 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 19-02-2021 20:19:32 :::