SHIV SANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court, whereby suit for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to gratuity and other retiral benefits was dismissed in appeal.

(2.) THE plaintiff joined as Inspector Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab on 26.09.1952. On 03.12.1958, the plaintiff was promoted and posted as Assistant Consolidation Officer. He continued to work till 03.03.1965, when he was relieved on the basis of the acceptance of his resignation. Subsequently, the plaintiff brought the suit for declaration claiming pension the plaintiff claimed pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits for the reason that he has completed the qualifying service of more than 10 years, therefore, under Rule 6.16 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Vol.II, he is entitled to pension. THE suit was decreed by the learned trial Court. However, in first appeal, the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed. THE learned first Appellate Court relied upon Rule 7.5(1) to return a finding that resignation entails forfeiture of past service, therefore, the plaintiff is not enetitled to pension.

(3.) IT is also necessary for us to make a reference to Rule 3.17A (d) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Volume II, Part I, which has been noticed in the reference order. The instant rule has been the basis of denial of pensionary benefits to a government employee, who had resigned from service. The same is being extracted hereunder: - "3.17A (d). Resignation from the public service or dismissal or removal from it for misconduct, insolvency, inefficiency, not due to age, or failure to pass a prescribed examination will entail forfeiture of past service in terms of Rule 4.19(1) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Volume II."