RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for counting the service rendered by him in the Haryana Tanneries Ltd., Jind w.e.f. 26.10.1975 to 30.11.1988 for the purpose of pension/retiral benefits and for the release of the benefits.

(2.) Petitioner was appointed as a skilled worker in the Haryana Tanneries Ltd. on 26.10.1975. He continued as such when along with other employees, he was retrenched w.e.f. 30.11.1988 on account of closure of the corporation. The Haryana Tanneries Employees Union (Regd.) filed CWP No. 9469 of 1988 titled as Haryana Tanneries Employees Union (Regd.) Jind, Haryana vs. State of Haryana and another, in this Court which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 01.12.1988 (Annexure P-1) with directions issued to the respondents to absorb the retrenched employees within a period of six months and if need be, give relaxation in age limit. The retrenched employees were also held entitled to take into account the service rendered in the Haryana Tanneries Ltd. in case they are appointed in pensionable jobs for the purpose of pension and other retiral benefits. In compliance with the said order passed by this Court, petitioner was appointed as Peon in the Revenue Department by the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani vide order dated 21.04.1991 and later on, his services were transferred to Kaithal District vide order dated 01.10.1992 and pay of the petitioner was protected by the Government of Haryana vide order dated 05.01.1996. Petitioner submitted a representation dated 06.05.2008 to the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal-respondent No. 2 praying for counting his service from 26.10.1975 to 30.11.1988 in the Haryana Tanneries Ltd. Jind in accordance with the order passed by this Court in Haryana Tanneries Employees Union (Regd.) Jind, Haryana . The case of the petitioner was recommended by respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 05.03.2009, which was returned back by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) Guhla, District Kaithal-respondent No. 3 with the remarks that the benefit of past service if is to be counted, the pension case be also sent along with the same for the approval of the Government. Petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation of 60 years on 30.06.2009 but while releasing his retiral benefits, the services rendered by him in the Haryana Tanneries Ltd. Jind, have not been counted nor any benefit granted.

(3.) This action of the respondents not granting him the benefit is under challenge in the present writ petition.