Allahabad High Court
Ram Khelavan And 4 Others vs Staet Of U.P. And 4 Others on 17 April, 2023
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6672 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ram Khelavan And 4 Others
Respondent :- Staet Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Devesh Mishra,Santosh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Devesh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. By means of present writ petition the petitioners have challenged order dated 20.03.2023, passed by the Sub District Magistrate, Fatehpur thereby rejecting claim of the petitioners for grant of pension. Further direction has been sought for direction to the respondents to add service of the petitioners rendered by them as 'Seasonal Collection Amin' and give them pensionary and other benefits according to Government Order dated 30.04.2019.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 was appointed on the post of Seasonal Collection Amin on 01.09.1983, while petitioner no. 2 on 17.01.1987, petitioner no. 3 on 21.05.1987, petitioner no. 4 on 22.09.1989 and petitioner no. 5 on 27.01.1994 in District Fatehpur. Their names finds mention in the select list prepared in the year 2010 to 2014 of Seasonal Collection Amin of District Fatehpur and in the year 2014, their services were regularised in pay scale of Rs.5200-20,200 with grade pay of Rs.2000/-. Subsequently the petitioners superannuated from service from 2014 to 2022.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that they had given representation to the respondent on 22.11.2022 for adding their services rendered by them while working as Seasonal Collection Amin and grant pension and other post retiral benefits.
5. The petitioners representation was considered by the respondents and the same was rejected by order dated 20.03.2023, on the ground that the petitioners have never worked as regular employees either on temporary or daily wage or as work charge employee and consequently their services rendered as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards grant of pension and accordingly rejected the representation.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary as well as contrary to the judgment of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey and 4 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others, Writ -A No. 5817 of 2020 (decided on 08.10.2021).
7. It is stated that persons similarly placed who were initially appointed as Seasonal Collection Amin, had approached this Court for similar relief. This Court after considering entire conspectus of the matter has given following finding :-
"24. In view of the above discussion and given the law elucidated by the Apex Court as well as by this Court in various pronouncements referred above, the services rendered by the petitioners as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and other retiral benefits to them on the pretext that their appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and nor from the date of their engagement as work charged employee.
25. Consequently, the writ petitioner is allowed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioners after taking into account their entire service including the service rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioners shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court, and the same shall be paid within the next two months. The respondents shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same fell due."
7. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition and has submitted that relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted as the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards counting their length of service for pensionary benefits and the petitioners have never worked as regular employee and therefore there is no infirmity in the impugned order rejecting claim of the petitioners.
8. It is stated that the petitioners were appointed as Collection Amin on substantial capacity on different dates from 2011 to 2014 and their services rendered previously cannot be considered for grant of pensionary benefits and their regular services can be counted only from the date of his regularisation and not previously.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
10. It is noticed that coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) has considered the entire conspectus of the controversy and has taken into consideration various judgments and in the case of similarly situated Seasonal Collection Amins has observed that the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin will also be counted towards calculation of pensionary benefits of such persons.
11. It is further noticed that Learned Standing Counsel could not argue any point to show that judgment in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra), is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
12. Considering that the case of the petitioners case is squarely covered by the judgment of coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) hence, there is no reason as to why same benefit cannot be granted to the petitioners.
13. Accordingly, present writ petition is liable to be allowed in terms of the directions issued in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra).
14. In view of the above the services rendered by the petitioners as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and other retiral benefits to him on the pretext that their appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and not from the date of their engagement as work charged employee.
15. Consequently, the writ petitioner is allowed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioners after taking into account their entire services including the service rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioners shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order and the same shall be paid to them within the next two months. The respondents shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same fell due.
Order Date :- 17.4.2023
A. Verma
(Alok Mathur, J.)
