HAWA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claim of the petitioner is that he is entitled to revision of pension on account of granting of special increments on completion of 8 and 18 years of service and is also entitled to higher standard scale on completion of 10 and 20 years of service as per the Government instructions. It is further contended that the petitioner shall be entitled to revision of the pay scale after the said increments are given effect to at the relevant time when they fell due to the petitioner. The petitioner has also claimed monetary benefit to leave encashment, gratuity and G.I.S amount and that the said amounts should be released along with interest @ 18% from the date they fell due to the petitioner.

(2.) THE State has filed reply and has specifically stated that the petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 30.6.1994 at his own request. The claim of military service benefit has been declined on the ground that he has already drawn military pension. The case of the petitioner has been examined by the respondents and he has been found entitled to increment on account of 8 years service w.e.f. 1.7.1992 which already stands granted to the petitioner vide order dated 19.5.1998. So far as the question of benefit 18 years service is concerned, the stand of the respondents is that the service of the petitioner falls short by one year, seven months and twenty seven days. As such, he is not entitled to the said increment. So far as second scheme for grant of higher standard scale is concerned, the same would be available on completion of 20 years of qualifying -service and that the same was introduced w.e.f. 1.1.1994. As a sequel thereto, the petitioner has been granted the next higher standard scale on completion of 10 years of service w.e.f. 1.1.1994 but payable w.e.f. 29.6.1994. So far as granting of the same relief on completion of 20 years is concerned, the stand of the respondents is that the petitioner has not completed the said period. As such, he would not be entitled to the second higher standard scale of pay. The case of the petitioner has been duly revised vide memo dated 9.10.1998 and communication in this regard has been duly sent to the petitioner.

(3.) FACED with this situation, the relief, which according to the respondents was to be granted to the petitioner, has been duly granted.