KEDARRAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TARUN Agarwala, J. 1. Heard Shri J. P. N. Singh, the learned Coun sel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a seasonal collection peon on a tempo rary basis on 8th of June, 1964 and worked in that capacity till he reached the age of superannuation on 31. 12. 2001. THE service record, which has been annexed as Annexure '2' to the writ petition, indicates that from 8th of April, 1964 to 4th of March, 1982, the petitioner has worked intermittently and there are gaps between the first appointment and the subsequent appointment, but, from 1. 4. 1982 till 31 st December, 2001, the service record shows that he has worked continuously without any break in service. THE service record also shows that the petitioner was categorised in a particular pay-scale and was not being paid a fixed or a lump-sum amount. Upon his retirement, the petitioner applied for pension, which remained pending, and consequently, the petitioner filed the present writ petition praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to grant pension and other retirement benefits to the petitioner.

(3.) RULE 56 (e) of the Fundamental RULEs provides payment of pension and other retirement benefits to every Government servant. For facility, the said rule is quoted hereunder: "56 (e) A retiring person shall be payable and other retirement benefits, if any, shall be available in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the relevant rules to every Government servant who retires or is required or al lowed to retire under this rule. Provided that where a Government servant who voluntarily retires or is allowed voluntarily to retire under this rule the appointing authority may allow him, for the purposes of pension and gratuity, if any, the benefit of additional service of five years or of such period as he would have served if he had continued till the ordinary date of his superannuation, whichever be less. "