PUNIRAM SHRIVAS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 24.10.2017 passed in WPS-5533 of 2017 whereby the Writ Petition filed by the appellant seeking relief for counting service of appellant, which he rendered prior to his permanent engagement, for the purpose of calculating pension has been dismissed.

(2.) Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the appellant was initially appointed as Daily Wage labour on 08.04.1980 for a period of 89 days. Employment and period of his engagement as Daily Wage labour was extended from time to time by the respondent for the same period. He was given appointment on the post of Watchman (Chowkidar) till further orders vide order dated 13.11.1996. Appellant retired from his service after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2004. Respondent department paid gratuity and other retiral benefits to the appellant but pension was not given. Representation submitted by the appellant for fixing pension was turned down by mentioning that his regular period of service comes to 7 years, 3 months and 22 days (from 13.11.1996 to 31.03.2004). His service period is less than pensionable service period of 10 years as permanent employee as such, he is not entitled for benefit of pension.

(3.) Appellant filed Writ Petition before this Court bearing No.WPS-4858 of 2010 challenging rejection of his claim for granting pension which came to be dismissed on 23.01.2013 by holding that appellant has not completed 10 years of qualifying service to get eligibility for pension. He was working prior to his becoming permanent employee only as Daily Wage labour with break of service after every 89 days and service rendered by him prior to becoming permanent employee cannot be counted for the purpose of total length of regular service. Against dismissal of Writ Petition, appellant filed Review Petition No.33 of 2013 which also came to be dismissed on 25.04.2013. Appellant thereafter filed Writ Appeal which was withdrawn by learned counsel appearing for the appellant for making representation to the department and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 06.04.2016 after some argument.