(1.) State is aggrieved by the impugned judgment wherein it is directed to count the untrained service put in by the respondent writ petitioner before commencement of his continuous qualifying service with effect from 15-7-1977. He had been initially appointed by the Manager of an Aided School on 8-8-1973. At that time he did not possess the training qualification. Therefore on the close of every academic year he was sent out and reappointed again on the commencement of the following academic year, until 14-7-1976 when he was deputed for B. Ed. course which he completed on 31-3-1977. Thereafter he was regularly appointed, as having passed B. Ed. degree, on 15-7-1977. He retired from service on 31-3-1999. While reckoning the qualified service for the purpose of his retiral benefits including pension, the service put in by him until 15-7-1977 including the period he spent for undergoing B. Ed. degree was not reckoned towards the qualifying service to compute his pension. Therefore he approached this Court.
(2.) The learned Single Judge found that he had been discriminated, as compared to the person dealt with in Ext. P 11. Therefore, it was directed that the short spells of services put in by him shall also be counted towards qualifying service for pension.
(3.) It is contended by the learned Government Pleader that the case considered in Ext. P 11 cannot be equated with that of the petitioner to contend that he had been discriminated. The incumbent covered by Ext. P 11 was a temporary appointee. The petitioner was always an aided school teacher. Therefore, Ext. P 11 cannot be cited to raise the contention of discrimination, it is contended. It is further submitted that R.31. Part III K.S.R. much relied on by the petitioner, is not applicable in his case. In this regard R.10 Chap.27A is much relied on. The said Rule provides that in reckoning length of service for computation of pension and gratuity, continuous service alone shall be reckoned as qualifying service.