RAMESH M CHOPDEKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Sonak for the petitioner and Mrs. Coutinho appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner is working as a wood-worker in the Goa Medical College and claims the benefit which is available to the employees who fall in the category of artisans, who were given the benefit of Fundamental Rule 56 (b), namely, that he should be allowed to serve until he completes 60 years of age. He has, however, been retired in the meanwhile on 30th September, 1999.

(3.) FOR the reasons which we have stated above, the Order retiring the petitioner with effect from 30th September 1999 is hereby interfered with and he will be entitled to serve the respondents until he completes 60 years of age. The fact, however, remains that he has been retired in the meanwhile on 30th September 1999. Mrs. Coutinho states that the respondents will reinstate the petitioner with continuity from 1st August 2000. Mr. Sonak states that the petitioner is not pressing for the back wages for the intervening period but prays for the leave which may be at his credit. The respondents may grant him the leave at his credit and to that extent only he will get the wages, if encashment is permissible. Since the petitioner is being re-instated, for the purpose of retirement benefits the intervening absence from service will not be treated as break. Rule made absolute in accordance with the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed. .