HUSAINBHAI NANUBHAI QUARESHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two petitions identical issues have been raised for consideration of this court by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the same proceed on almost similar facts and arises from the same department and same category of services, these matters are being taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners are the retired workcharged employees of the respondent. If we go by the services which are being rendered by the petitioners to the respondents as workcharged employees, it fall short of the qualifying services making them eligible for pension. However, it is not in dispute that in case the services which have rendered by the petitioners to the respondent as daily wager prior to taking them in workcharge establishment then certainly they have the qualifying services to the extent of making them eligible for pension and as a result thereof they are entitled for all the retirementary benefits as provided under the Bombay Civil Services Rules as well as the Government Resolution dated 17/10/1988.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the daily wages services of the petitioners as daily wagers rendered by them prior to they have been brought in the workcharged establishment by the respondent are countable towards the qualifying services for pension. Whereas the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is that the same cannot be countable and for which reliance has been placed on some of the provisions of Bombay Civil Services Rules. The petitioners made reference to the Government Resolution No.WCE/1588/(5)(2)/G2 dated 17/10/1988 which inter-alia, what the learned counsel for the petitioners contend, provides that if the daily wager has put in more than ten years services as on 1-10-1988 he shall be entitled for pension, gratuity etc. However, this point does not detain much to this Court as these matters are squarely covered by the two decisions of this court one given by the learned Single Judge in special civil application No.2836/98 decided on 27/08/1988 and second of the Division Bench in L.P.A. No.1495/97 decided on 6/08/1998. Learned counsel for the respondent also does not dispute that these matters are covered by these two decisions.