RASILABEN B RAJGURU Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order directing the respondents to give the benefit of her services rendered from 5.1.1965 to 18.8.1969 under the District Education Committee, Bhavnagar for the purpose of pensionary benefit.

(2.) It is the contention on behalf of the petitioner that she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the Primary School No. 42 under the Administrative Officer, District Education Committee, Bhavnagar and she continued to serve till 18.8.1969. That on 19.8.1969, she joined as Primary Teacher under the Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti after resigning from the previous post without any break in service. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that she was to superannuate on 31.12.2000, she made a representation on 16.11.1995 that as she was to retire in about 4 years, her services from 4.1.1965 to 18.8.1969 under the District Education Committee, Bhavnagar and services from 19.8.1969 to the date of superannuation be treated as continuous for the purpose of pension. It appears that the Administrative Officer of Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti by letter dated 1.1.1996 addressed to the petitioner forwarded a communication dated 17.12.1994 of the Director of Primary Education informing that those Teachers of the District Panchayat and the Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti, who leave Government service on resignation shall not be entitled to pension. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the State Government has issued a resolution dated 24.1.1967 whereby, the benefit of past services except that of seniority is given to an employee when there is no break in service, who is appointed from one department to the other department through recognized agency. The petitioner has also relied upon the resolution dated 23.12.1987, which provides that in case of Government recognized non-Government Education Institutions where pension scheme is in force their previous administrative service rendered in the Education Department or in Local Self Government Institutions like District School Boards, School Committees, Education Committees of Municipalities/ Municipal Corporation/ Municipal Corporation should be counted for the purpose of pension. Therefore, it is submitted that the decision of the respondents in not extending the benefit of past service for the purpose of pension is arbitrary and de-hors the aforesaid Government Resolutions and therefore, it is requested to allow the present Special Civil Application. He has relied upon the decision of this Court dated 29.11.2006 rendered in Special Civil Application No.7880 of 1997 as well as another decision of this Court dated 6.8.1999 rendered in Special Civil Application No.8580 of 1989 whereby, the learned Single Judge of this Court has directed the department to consider the past service of the Teacher for the purpose of pension.

(3.) Ms. Kiran Pandey, learned AGP while relying upon Rule 25 and Rule 33 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules; 2002 has opposed the present Special Civil Application and has submitted that considering Rule 33 of the Rules, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of her past service while she was in service in District Education Committee, Bhavnagar and therefore, it is requested to dismiss the present Special Civil Application.