STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SAVITRIBEN N TANDON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 4494 of 1987. Respondent No. 1 in the Special Civil Application is the appellant herein. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein are the legal representatives of the original petitioner in the Special Civil Application and respondent No. 4 herein is respondent No. 4 in the Special Civil Application. It will be convenient if we refer to the parties as per their array in the Special Civil Application, except respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein, who if occasion therefore arises, shall be referred to as 'the legal representatives'.

(2.) The original petitioner was employed in the erstwhile Sind Government on and from 14-3-1941. His employment upto 11-6-1945 was on temporary basis. With effect from 12-6-1945, he became a permanent employee of the erstwhile Sind Government and he continued to be so upto 30-10-1947. There was a break in service between 1-11-1947 and 19-5-1948. On and from 20- 5-1948; the original petitioner was employed in the State of Bombay. On 27-9-1949, he was transferred to the Bombay Housing Board. On bifurcation of the State of Bombay, the original petitioner was taken over by the Gujarat Housing Board on 1-5-1960. The original petitioner retired as an employee of the Gujarat Housing Board on 19-4-1974. The original petitioner, while he was in the services of the Gujarat Housing Board, opted for the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme of the Gujarat Housing Board and obtained all the benefits under the Scheme, on his superannuation. However, by preferring the Special Civil Application, the original petitioner coveted the relief of pension including arrears and other ancillary benefits. The learned single Judge, who dealt with the Special Civil Application, opined that with regard to the eligibility for pension of the original petitioner, there cannot be any doubt and chose to cast the liability to pay such pension on respondent No. 1. The initial order of the learned single Judge was made on 8-4-1992 and on further working out of the details of the pensionary benefits, the learned single Judge made the ultimate order on 2-9-1992 directing respondent No. 1 to disburse a sum of Rs. 1,49,248-40 Ps., as well as interest thereon. The learned single Judge also directed payment of family pension to legal representative No. 1.

(3.) We heard Mr. Anil R. Dave, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for respondent No. 1/appellant herein; Mr. K. G. Vakharia, learned Senior Counsel, who lent his services to the legal representatives, at the instance of the Court; and Mrs. K. A. Mehta, learned Counsel for respondent No. 4.