Allahabad High Court
Dr. Satyendra Kumar Chauhan vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 21 October, 2022
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13183 of 2022
Petitioner :- Dr. Satyendra Kumar Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghwendra Prasad Mishra,Avneesh Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Petitioner was initially appointed as Ayurvedic Medical Officer on ad-hoc basis on 18.06.1988. His services were regularized on 16.03.2005. A claim was raised by the petitioner for inclusion of such services towards qualifying service for the purpose of payment of pension. Petitioner's claim in that regard has been rejected by the State Government vide order dated 20.12.2021, relying upon the ordinance issued by the State Government on 21.10.2020, in respect of counting of qualifying service for the purpose of pension. This order is assailed on the ground that claim of the petitioner with reference to the ordinance has not been examined as was required in law.
It transpires that similar issue fell for consideration before this Court in Writ Petition No. 9396 of 2021 along with connected petitions and after examining the statutory provisions, as also the applicable judgments the aspects which requires consideration by the State Government has been specified in following words:-
''The question of service discharged in a temporary or ad hoc capacity followed by regularisation and whether such periods are liable to be included would also have to be necessarily examined in the backdrop of whether the engagement had been made against a permanent or temporary post that was available as also whether the procedure as prescribed under the relevant service rules had been adhered to.
Ultimately all the issues which are noticed and enunciated above would merit consideration before the respondents evaluate the claims of the individual petitioners here. The Court is of the firm opinion that a claim for pensionary benefits cannot be negatived solely on the basis of a mere reiteration of the Validating Act having been introduced. The respondents would have to necessarily evaluate such claims bearing in mind the following questions which would arise:-
A. Whether the service rendered in temporary, ad hoc, or officiating capacity was one which was discharged against a permanent or temporary post;
B. Whether the appointment was made in accordance with the provisions made in the prevalent service rules;
C. Whether such service can be excluded notwithstanding the provisions made in the proviso to Rule 3(8) of the 1961 Rules;
D. Whether the service rendered in a work-charged establishment followed by regularisation can be legally excluded while computing qualifying service;
E. Whether such service was performed in connection with work which was regular and perennial and the engagement in a work charged establishment was a mere ruse to deny benefits of long service.
All these and other aspects would merit further examination by the respondents before ruling upon the claims of the petitioners here for grant of pensionary benefits.
For the aforesaid purpose, the matters shall stand remitted to the competent authority under the respondents to reevaluate the claim of the petitioners here in accordance with the observations made hereinabove. The exercise of reconsideration may be concluded with expedition and preferably within a period of 3 months of the date of presentation of a duly authenticated copy of this order.
The writ petitions shall stand disposed of in the above terms."
From a perusal of the order passed by the State Government it does not appear that claim of the petitioner has been examined on the relevant parameters, as have been specified by this Court in the aforesaid order. In such circumstances order passed by the State Government rejecting petitioner's claim dated 20.12.2021 cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. Matter stands remitted to the State Government for afresh consideration of cause in accordance with the observations quoted above by passing a reasoned order within a period of four months.
Subject to the above observations and directions this petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.10.2022
P Kesari
