GULAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as JBT Teacher on 01.10.1963. During service, the petitioner improved his qualification. On 01.03.1976, the petitioner submitted his resignation along with three months notice which was subsequently withdrawn on the same day. He applied for leave from 06.08.1976 to 01.12.1997. After availing leave, the petitioner submitted his joining report on 02.12.1997. However, he was not allowed to join duty. He served a legal notice on 24.01.1998. In reply whereof the petitioner was informed by the respondents that his resignation has been accepted vide order dated 21.03.1980. The order dated 21.03.1980 was challenged by filing a Civil Suit which was decreed on 16.11.2000 and the petitioner was allowed to join duty from the date of his joining report. Appeal filed by the respondents against the decree dated 16.11.2000 was accepted by the learned Lower Appellate Court and the suit of the petitioner dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner challenged the judgment and decree of the learned Lower Appellate Court before this Court which came to be dismissed on 22.09.2006. The SLP filed by the petitioner against the judgments aforesaid has also been dismissed on 5.2.2007. The petitioner made representation on 29.09.2007 for releasing his pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits with effect from 21.03.1980 which has been rejected by respondent No. 2 vide order dated 02.07.2008 (Annexure P-7) on the ground that the petitioner had not retired from service and that the claim of the petitioner is belated. It is this order which has been challenged by the petitioner claiming pension and other retiral benefits from 01.03.1980 with all consequential benefits with interest.

(3.) In the reply, the respondents have reiterated the averments made in the impugned order. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted his resignation and that he is not retired from service, therefore, he is not entitled for pension. It is further submitted that in the civil suit, the petitioner has lost the legal battle upto Hon'ble Supreme Court. Pension rules envisage payment of pension to a government servant, who retires or retired from service. The petitioner did not retire from service rather he has resigned from service. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioner is grossly belated.