LAWS(TRIP)-2014-7-52

HARENDRA CHANDRA DEBNATH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 01, 2014
Harendra Chandra Debnath Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for grant of pension and family pension in respect of the deceased, Harimohan Debnath. The undisputed facts are that, Harimohan Debnath, after a process of selection joined as a Daily Rated Worker (Cane & Bamboo Work) on no work no wage basis at wages of Rs. 10/- (ten) per day on purely ad hoc basis with the Director, Regional Design Centre, camp at Agartala. At that time, the date of birth of Harimohan Debnath was taken to be 17.03.1948 meaning that he was more than 26 (twenty six) years of age at the relevant time. Harimohan Debnath was appointed as skilled Daily Rated Worker vide another order dated 27.01.1978 in the scale of Rs. 19/- (nineteen) per day. He was later interviewed and in the letter calling him for interview, he was asked to bring his original certificates, testimonials with regard to qualification, age and experience. Pursuant to this interview, Harimohan Debnath was selected vide order dated 15.07.1978 as Assistant Craftsman in the Advanced Training in Fine Cane & Bamboo Handicrafts and Allied Technology, All India Handicrafts Board, Agartala w.e.f. 22.06.1978, in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560/-. Thus the appointment of Harimohan Debnath on daily wages was followed by his regular appointment. He was confirmed, promoted and served the department till the year 2003.

(2.) It appears that in the meantime some objections were raised and the date of birth of Harimohan Debnath was changed from 17.03.1948 to 02.03.1943. This change was made on the advice of the audit and there is no material to show that this change was made after giving notice to Harimohan Debnath.

(3.) Be that as it may, the fact is that taking the date of birth as 02.03.1943, Harimohan Debnath was retired in the year 31st March, 2003. However, pension was not released to him on the ground that when he was initially appointed he was overage. According to the department, the maximum age for appointment in the department was 25 years and since he was born on 02.03.1943, in 1978 he was more than 35 years of age and overage by more than 10 years. Even if his date of birth is taken to be 17.03.1948 years, then also he is overage.