C. L. JOHN Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for a direction to the respondents to pay his pension treating his services as continuous from 5-5-1955 to 31-7-1990.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as an Overseer from 5-5-1955 in Part C State of Bhopal. He became an employee of the Public Works Department in the State of M. P. from 1-11-1956. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer in M. P. Housing Board from 26-4-1965. He was relieved from the post of Overseer in PWD. The petitioner worked with the M. P. Housing Board upto 24-1-1985. He was absorbed in the services of the Town Improvement Trust, Rewa as per order dated 24-1-1985 of the Government of M. P. It is specifically provided in this order (Annexure P-4) that the petitioner would have to resign from this post in the M. P. Housing Board. Town Improvement Trust, Rewa later merged in the Municipal Corporation, Rewa. The petitioner was transferred in 1987 to Special Area Development Authority, Mandideep and then to the Bhopal Development Authority and to the Town Improvement Trust, Sehore. He retired on 31-7-1990. The employees of the M.P. Housing Board were granted the benefit of pension from 1-7-1973. The M. P. Housing Board is prepared to pay pension of the petitioner from the date of his appointment by the M. P. Housing Board to the date he left the Board and joined the Town Improvement Trust, Rewa. The M. P. Housing Board is, however, not prepared to pay any pension to the petitioner in respect of his services prior to his appointment by the M. P. Housing Board and after he joined the services of the Town Improvement Trust, Rewa.

(3.) The petitioner's case is that he did not resign from the post of overseer in PWD and therefore, his lien on this post continued even after his appointment by the M. P. Housing Board. His post in the M. P. Housing Board was pensionable and on his appointment in the Town Improvement Trust, Rewa he is entitled to pension. In short his plea is that there was no break in the continuity of the service and as he has put in more than 33 years of service in all he is entitled to full pension and gratuity. He has claimed interest also because of the delay in the payment of gratuity and pension.