B Appa Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9779 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9779 AP
Judgement Date : 21 December, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

B Appa Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 21 December, 2022

                                           1




         THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

               WRIT PETITION (A.T) No.801 of 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed, seeking the following relief:

".....to issue a Writ, Order or direction to hold the action on the part of the respondents in not computing the service rendered by the petitioner prior to his appointment as Deputy Jailor in the Department of Prisons and Correctional Services in the cadre of Junior Assistant in the Unit of appointment of Police Department i.e Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam District towards qualifying service for the purpose of pension and other consequential benefits vide proceedings Memo No.22608/PRI/A2/2003, dated 20.01.2014 of the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to rules apart from violative of Article 14, 16 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to compute the service rendered by the petitioner in the category of Junior Assistant in the Unit of appointment of Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam prior to his appointment as Deputy Jailor in the Prisons and Correctional Services Department towards qualifying service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and release all the monetary benefits including the arrears on such refixation of pension amount and pass such other orders."

2. Heard Mr.P.J.Theja Sai, learned counsel for the petitioner

and learned Government Pleader, Services-I for the respondents.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was

initially appointed as Junior Assistant in the year 1984 in the

Police Department. While the petitioner is working therein, he was

selected as Deputy Jailor by direct recruitment through

Employment Exchange. Hence the petitioner submitted his

resignation letter dated 29.03.1994 and the same was accepted by

the Superintendent of Police. The petitioner joined in the post of

Deputy Jailor on 29.03.1994 by excluding the past service and

retired from service in the year 2014. On account of non

computing the service rendered in the earlier post of Junior

Assistant held by him while working in the Police Department i.e

Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam, the petitioner is losing

financial benefits. If the service is added to the qualifying service

for the purpose of fixation of pension, the petitioner would be

entitled to higher pension. In similar circumstances, the

Government issued orders in respect of one Mr. M. Vara Kumar

and others, who were earlier working as Warders, subsequently

they were selected as Deputy Jailors through direct recruitment

clarifying that their past service and the training period countable

for pension in terms of G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 17.05.2010.

Therefore the petitioner made a representation to the 2nd

respondent requesting to count his past service prior to his

appointment, but the 1st respondent rejected the claim the

petitioner resigned without permission from the Police Department

and joined as Deputy Jailor in Prisons Department, which is illegal

and arbitrary. Hence inaction of the 1st respondent is questioned

in this writ petition.

4. During hearing learned counsel for the petitioner

reiterated the contents urged in the writ affidavit. Whereas learned

Government Pleader for Services-I for the respondents mainly

contended that the petitioner submitted his resignation without

proper permission from the Police Department and joined in

Prisons Department. Therefore the petitioner has to forgo all the

benefits. Hence the claim of the petitioner is rejected by the 1st

respondent. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the

judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of Supreme Court in

"State of Rajasthan and Others Vs. O.P.Gupta"1 wherein the it

was held as follows:

"15. Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 hereinafter referred to as "the Rules" reads as follows:

25. Forfeiture of Service on resignation

(1) Resignation from a service or a post, entails forfeiture of past service.

(2) A resignation shall not entail forfeiture of past service if it has been submitted to take up, with proper permission,

MANU/SC/1197/2022

another appointment, whether temporary or permanent, under the Government where service qualifies.

(3) Interruption in service in case falling under Sub-rule (2), due to the two appointments being a different stations, not exceeding the joining time admissible under the Rules of transfer, shall be covered by grant of leave of any kind due to the Government servant on the date of relief or by formal condonation to the extent to which the period is not covered by leave due to him".

5. As could be seen from the resignation order dated

29.03.1994 it is clear that as per rule 39(1) of A.P.State and Sub-

ordinate Service Rules, the resignation of the petitioner is

accepted. In the impugned Memo dated 20.01.2014, it is stated as

follows:

"3. In the light of the above rule position the request of Sri B. Appa Rao, Jailor to count his past service rendered in Police Department as Junior Assistant for the purpose of pensionary benefits is not feasible for acceptance and is rejected, since the individual has resigned the post of Junior Assistant in the Police Department without taking proper permission from the Police Department and he joined as Deputy Jailor in Prisons Department in violation of Rule 26(1) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules 1980. However the training period of the individual as Deputy Jailor is countable as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits as per the amendment issued in G.O.Ms.No.178, Fin (Pen.I) Department, dated 17.05.2010".