SWAMIDEEN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vivek Shandilya, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Manish Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for state functionaries.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed for direction upon the respondents to release the retiral benefits including gratuity and pension along with interest.

(3.) It is contended that the petitioner was initially appointed as Work Charge/Chaukidar in the month of July, 1987, in the Office of respondent No. 2 (Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Department, Division Banda, District Banda). His service stood regularized from 11.1.2013. He attained the age of superannuation on 31.12.2014 i.e. after completing 27 years of service. It is further contended that respondent's department is not releasing the retiral dues of the petitioner. Due to the fact, his service is regularized in the year 2013 and he has worked as regular employee for only about two years. In view of the Government Order dated 1.7.1999, pension, gratuity and other dues are payable only on completion of ten years of regular service. Learned Senior counsel has placed reliance upon judgment of Apex Court in cases of Prem Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others passed in Civil Appeal No. 6798 of 2019, decided on 02.09.2019, Habib Khan vs. State of Uttarakhand and others , passed in Civil Appeal No. 10806 of 2017, decided on 23.08.2017 and judgment of this Court in Service Single No.12417 of 2018, decided on 02.05.2018, in which the Apex Court has held that the earlier service rendered in a Work Charged Establishment, the same is to be counted towards the service of an employee.