PANNA LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 25.2.2005 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by Executive Engineer (Construction Division-4) (Kumbh Mela), Public Works Department, Allahabad, whereby he has held that that the petitioner is not entitled for any pension having not completed qualifying service, Sri Panna Lal, petitioner has approached this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Sri Sudhakar Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially engaged in work charge as muster roll employee in Oct., 1981. He was made permanent muster roll employee by order dated 1.7.1984 and thereafter by order dated 30.6.1997 he was allowed regular pay scale and other allowances as admissible to regular employees w.e.f. 7.5.1993 though in work charge. This benefit was extended to other work charge employees also pursuant to certain direction passed by this Court in Writ Petitions No. 41825 of 1992, 41826 of 1992, 41827 of 1992 and 41829 of 1992. The petitioner was placed on regular establishment on 1.8.2000 and thereafter on attaining the age of superannuation he retired on 31.8.2004. Since he was not paid pension he made representation to the authority concerned for treating his qualifying service w.e.f. 7.5.1993. As the respondents failed to respond, the petitioner came to this Court through Writ Petition No. 53080 of 2004 which was disposed of vide order dated 14.12.2004 with the following directions:

(3.) Pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Court, the petitioner made a representation dated 26.12.2004 to the Executive Engineer who has decided the same vide order impugned in this writ petition, holding that the petitioner was placed on regular establishment only on 1.10.2000 and prior thereto he worked as work charge employee and service rendered by him as a work charge employee cannot be taken into account for purpose of qualifying service and, therefore, he is not entitled to pension and other benefits.