H LALDINGNGHETA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were appointed as Middle School Teacher in the year 2001 under Centrally Sponsored Scheme ( for short 'CSS'). After the CSS was discontinued in the year 2003, all the petitioners were engaged as Middle School Teachers on contract basis under Sarva Shiksha Abhyan ( for short 'SSA'). The SSA was also discontinued in the year 2008. Thereafter, the petitioners were engaged on contract basis under the State of Mizoram by different engagement orders in the year 2008. As the respondents were not considering the case of the petitioners for regularization in their service they have approached this Court by way of W.P (C) No. 23 of 2013 which was disposed of by this Court on 04-09-2013 directing the State respondents that till the services of the petitioners therein were regularized under the Regularization Scheme of 2008, the Government shall not go for recruitment from the open market. In terms of the judgment and order dated 04-09-2013 passed by this Court in W.P (C) No. 23 of 2013, the case of the petitioners were considered by the respondents and on the recommendation of the DPC the petitioners were regularized and appointed to the post of Middle School Teacher by order dated 9th September, 2014. By the said order dated 9th September, 2014 it was further stipulated that in compliance of the Government of Mizoram, Finance Department's Notification dated 27-02-2012, past services of contract employees shall not be counted for the purpose of pension benefits since the petitioners were regularized after 01-09-2010. Being aggrieved by the stipulation contained in the order dated 9th September, 2014 with regard to non-counting of their past services for the purpose of pension benefits, the petitioners are before this Court.

(2.) Heard Mr. N. Sailo, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. A.K. Rokhum, learned Additional Advocate General, Mizoram appearing for the State respondents.

(3.) Mr. N. Sailo, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the stipulation contained in the order dated 9th September, 2014 for non counting of the past services of the petitioners for the purpose of pension benefits was made on the basis of the Government of Mizoram, Finance Department Notification dated 27-01-2012. He submits that the Notification dated 27-02- 2012 has already been set aside and quashed by this Court by judgment and order dated 28-05-2014 passed in W.P (C) No. 25 of 2013. It is submitted that the order dated 9th September, 2014 was issued only after the judgment and order dated 28-05-2014 was passed and therefore the respondents under no circumstances could have made the stipulation contained in the order dated 9th September, 2014 based on the Notification dated 27-02-2012. It is further contended by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the case of the petitioners are not covered by the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010 (herein after referred to as "Pension Scheme of 2010'). It is further contended that Clause 2.1 (f) of the Pension Scheme of 2010 provides that such scheme shall not be applicable to persons whose terms and conditions of service are regulated by or under the provision of the Constitution or any other law or specific scheme for the time being in force. It is also submitted that this Court in a similar matter had considered the issue in W.P (C) No. 93 of 2014 by judgment and order dated 01-05- 2015 and has held that the petitioners therein being regularized under Government of Mizoram Regularization of Contract Employees Scheme, 2008 ( hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme of 2008') the State respondents were directed to count the past services rendered by the petitioners as continuous contract employee as qualifying service towards leave and pensionary benefits and that the petitioners shall also be paid pension as per the provision of Central Service Rule (Pension Rules, 1972). The said judgment has not been put to challenge by the State respondents and therefore the same has attained finality. He also submits that under the Scheme of 2008 at Clause 7 therein, it is provided that on regularization, past services rendered as continuous contract employees shall be counted as qualifying service for leave and pensionary benefits only. The said Scheme of 2008 has not been amended and the same is still in force and therefore, the respondents could not have given the stipulation as contained in the impugned order dated 9th September, 2014. He therefore submits that the same requires modification by setting aside the stipulation that the past services rendered by the petitioners as continuous contract employee shall not be counted for the purpose of pension benefits as they were regularized prior to 01- 09-2010.