BENI PARSHAD SINGH Vs. PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, LUDHIANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of impugned order dated 06.08.1993 (Annexure P -9) , whereby, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected without assigning any reason. A further prayer has also been made for issuance of direction to respondents to consider his two years' extraordinary leave with effect from 18.02.1981 to 17.02.1983 as qualifying period towards pension and other benefits such as annual increment, gratuity etc.

(2.) THE petitioner joined respondent -University on 16.04.1966. During his service, he was granted two years' extraordinary leave with effect from 18.02.1981 to 17.02.1983 to enable him to join foreign assignment by the University. A letter was issued by respondent No.2 i.e., Comptroller, Punjab Agricultural University that during extraordinary leave, contribution to CPF account was admissible in view of Punjab Government letter dated 18.12.1970. In response thereto, the petitioner deposited the amount of CPF in the account.

(3.) THE respondent -University adopted the Pension Scheme for the employees of the University vide notification dated 20.11.1991, whereby, options were called within a period of four months from the employees of the University, who were in the service of the University since 01.01.1986 and onwards. On retirement, the petitioner submitted all requisite pension documents to the respondentUniversity within the prescribed period for grant of pension but the pension was sanctioned by excluding two years' extraordinary leave of foreign assignment towards qualifying service for the purpose of grant of pension and other benefits. The petitioner submitted a detailed representation to the respondent -University for counting his two years' extraordinary leave period as qualifying service as he had already deposited the requisite amount of his share as well as the employer's contribution for the extraordinary leave period. Without considering the relevant rule i.e., Rule 3.6 of the Pension Rules of the University, the impugned order was passed and the claim of the petitioner was rejected, which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.