STATE OF HARYANA Vs. S.M.ACHARYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that arises for consideration in the instant appeal is, whether the service of the respondent rendered with the D.A.V.College, Hassangarh, was liable to be taken into consideration along with the service rendered by him with C.R.K.College, Jind, as qualifying service. Rule 6 of the Haryana Affiliated Colleges (Pension and Contributory Provident Fund) Rules, 1999 is the relevant provision, for the determination of the above issue. Rule 6 aforementioned is extracted hereunder:

(2.) UNDER proviso to Clause (v) of Rule 6 extracted above, for taking into consideration the qualifying service in an earlier employment, it is imperative that there should be no break in service. A perusal of the impugned order however reveals that the respondent continued to render service with the D.A.V.College, Hassangarh, till 05.09.1983, whereafter he joined his employment with the C.R.K.College, Jind. On his employment with the C.R.K.College, Jind, deduction towards C.P.F. commenced from 01.05.1984. The above factual position depicted in the impugned order, gives an impression that, the respondent was unemployed from 06.09.1983 to 30.04.1984. The above break in service was not taken into consideration by the High Court, while passing the impugned order. The above factual position would have made the respondent's service in his earlier employment, ineligible for computation towards qualifying service.

(3.) IN the above view of the matter, the second question which arises for consideration is, whether in terms of Rule 6 extracted hereinabove, the respondent was entitled to count the service rendered by him in the D.A.V.College, Hassangarh, towards qualifying service. Yet again, there is a predicament on account of the fact, that the proviso under Clause (v) of Rule 6 also mandates that the said service could be taken into consideration as qualifying service, subject to the condition, that the contributory provident fund account of the employee in the previous college, continued as such, in the subsequent college. Insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, learned counsel for the appellants invited our attention to a communication dated 10.07.1984 (appended to the instant civil appeal as Annexure P -1). The above communication is being extracted hereunder: