MAHA SINGH SINHMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING served the Government faithfully and with sincerity the petitioner was forced to make representations one after another for getting post-retirement benefits and ultimately knock the doors of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) ADMITTED facts of the case are that the petitioner retired from service with effect from 31. 3. 1992 on attaining the age of superannuation. He had requested the Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Rohtak, as early as on 31. 10. 1992 that his case for pension was not being forwarded. He also prayed that if there was some defect or deficiency in his pension case, order for provisional pension be issued. Then it was held out to the petitioner that his service book was missing and efforts were being made to trice out. The petitioner ran from pillar to post for completing his service book and other papers so that he could persuade the departmental authorities to release his attempts proved futile. He was not even allowed to cross the efficiency bar which was due on 1. 10. 1986.

(3.) RESPONDENTS have pleaded that on account of non-availability of the service book and complete record relating to the petitioner, his pension case could not be finalised in time. It was ultimately finalised in October, 1993 and PPO/gpo were issued on 1. 11. 1993. Respondents have also given out that earlier the petitioner had sued the Government and prayed for injunction against his retirement with effect from 31. 3. 1992 but he had failed in that effort.