Delhi High Court
Mirza Zafar Begg vs Jamia Millia Islamia Through Its ... on 31 January, 2013
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No.1902/2008
% January 31, 2013
MIRZA ZAFAR BEGG ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Pragya, Advocate.
versus
JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. A. Siddiqui, Advocate with Mr.
Rohit Gandhi, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the relief of
grant of pensionary benefits by including the period of initial employment as
an ad hoc employee/Personal Assistant with the respondent No.1-University
in March, 1988, instead of the subsequent date taken of 17.1.1995. It is not
disputed that the petitioner did in fact join the services of respondent No.1 as
Personal Assistant in March, 1988, and thereafter the petitioner's services
WP(C) No.1902/2008 Page 1 of 6
were regularized on the said post of Personal Assistant in the Department
and Faculty of Engineering and Technology w.e.f 17.1.1995. The petitioner
thereafter retired on 30.6.2004.
2. Ordinarily, entitlement to pension is after completion of ten
years of service, and which in the present case if the petitioner is taken to
have been appointed on 17.1.1995, cannot be said to be completed.
3. The petitioner however relies upon the clarification dated
11.6.2004 issued by the respondentNo.2/Ministry of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pensions. This circular provides that if there is only a
technical break between different periods of ad hoc services, then, the total
periods of the ad hoc services have to be counted as qualifying services
alongwith the regular services for pension purposes. This letter dated
11.6.2004 reads as under:-
" 3rd Floor Lok Nayak Bhavan,
New Delhi-110 003, 11th June, 2004.
To
Prof. Zahid H. Khan,
Registrar,
Jamia Millia Islamia University,
Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Marg,
New Delhi-110025
Subject: Relaxation of 3 days in minimum qualifying service for grant
of pension or Counting of ad-hoc service as qualifying
WP(C) No.1902/2008 Page 2 of 6
service for pension-Case of Shri M. Zafar Begg.
************************************************
Sir,
I am directed to refer to Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI)
University's letter No.2359(MZB)RO/Estt./2004 Dr.No.16 dated 8th
June, 2004 on the subject cited above and to say that the minimum
qualifying service required for grant of pension as provided in Rule
49(2)(b) is ten years. Under the provision of Rule 49(3) the above
condition stand automatically relaxed by 3 months for rounding of 9
years 9 months qualifying service to 10 years. Further relaxation of 3
days to above condition is not possible. However, as far as clarification
relating to technical breaks is concerned, it may be clarified here that
technical break(s) of one or two days given due to administrative
reasons between ad-hoc service or between ad-hoc and regular service,
are not to be treated as interruption w.r.t. to condition (iv) below for the
purpose of counting of ad-hoc service as qualifying service in
continuation with regular service, for pension purpose subject to
satisfaction of following conditions:
(i) The ad-hoc appointments are made/continued with the approval of
the competent authority.
(ii) The ad-hoc appointees satisfy the educational and other essential
qualifications prescribed for appointment on a regular basis.
(iii) The ad-hoc appointees are allowed the same pay and allowance and
other conditions as are applicable to those appointed on a regular basis
and
(iv) The ad-hoc service is continuous and is followed without
interruption by regular appointment (substantive or officiating or
temporary).
2. The case of Shri M. Zafar Begg may be settled accordingly.
Yours faithfully,
(Geeta Ram)
Director (PW)"
(underlining is added)
4. The respondent No.1 though had filed a counter affidavit
disputing in law the entitlement of the petitioner, however, the respondent
No.1 has subsequently filed an affidavit dated 2.11.2012 giving the total
period of ad hoc services alongwith artificial breaks, of the petitioner, and
the details are as under:-
S. Nature of Period of Appointment/Ext. Date of break
No. Appoint
1. Ad-hoc Four three months w.e.f. the date of ---
joining i.e. 2.3.88
2. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 3.6.88 to 2.9.88 or till regular 02.06.1988
selection is made whichever is
earlier
3. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 5.9.88 to 4.12.88 or till regular 3 (Sat),
selection is made whichever is
earlier 4(sun).9.1988
4. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 5.12.88 to 4.3.89 or till regular Continued
selection is made whichever is
earlier
5. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 8.3.89 to 7.9.89 or till regular 5(sun), 6& 7
selection is made whichever is
earlier (H/B),3.1989
6. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 11.9.89 for a period of 180 8(H/B),9(Sat) &
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier 10(sun).09.1988
7. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 14.3.90 for a period of 180 11,12 (H) &
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier 13(B),3.1990
8. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 21.09.1990 for a period of 180 20.09.1990 (B)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
9. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 21.3.1991 for a period of 180 20.03.1991(B)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
10. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 18.09.1991 for a period of 180 17.09.1991(B)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
11. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 17.03.1992 till the end of 16.03.1992 (B)
current academic session or till
selection on the post through S.C.
whichever is earlier. (Academic
Session ended on 15.5.1992)
12. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 19.5.1992 for a period of 180 16(Sat), 17(Sun)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier & 18.5.1992(B)
13. Ad-hoc w.e.f. the date of joining for a period Continued
of 180 days or till selection on the
post through S.C. or till further order
whichever is earlier (date of joining
09.10.1992)
14. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 8.4.1993 for a period of 180 7.4.1993(B)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
15. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 6.10.1993 for a period of 180 5.10.1993(B)
days or till appointment on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
16. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 5.4.1994 for a period of 180 4.4.1994(B)
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. whichever is earlier
17. Ad-hoc w.e.f. 4.10.1994 for a period of 180 2(sun) 3
days or till the selection on the post
through S.C. or till further order (B/H).10.1994
whichever is earlier
18. Probation w.e.f. 17.01.1995
This affidavit was filed pursuant to the directions of the Court.
5. In view of the categorical language of the circular dated
11.6.2004 of the respondent No.2, and the statement of facts mentioned in
the affidavit dated 2.11.2012 filed by the respondent No.1 giving the service
details of the petitioner with respect to the total periods of ad hoc
appointment, it is clear that the petitioner was only given artificial breaks for
his not continuing in service. Therefore, the circular dated 11.6.2004 of the
respondent No.2 indubitably applies.
6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The petitioner be
granted pensionary benefits taking his appointment w.e.f March, 1988 and
the date of his retirement as 30.6.2004. The necessary pensionary benefits be
now given to the petitioner within a period of three months from today. The
petitioner will be entitled to interest on arrears payable at 9% per annum
simple from the date of filing of this petition till the date of payment. In
case, the pensionary benefits are not given within three months from today,
thereafter, the respondent No.1 will be liable to pay interest @ 12% per
annum. No costs.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
JANUARY 31, 2013
Ne
