ISHWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking for a direction to count the service rendered in the Judicial Department from 12.9.1981 to 15.01.1987 for the purpose of computing service towards grant of retiral benefits. Learned State counsel contended that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought i.e. to count the service rendered in judicial Department for the reason that the petitioner did not take permission while applying for the post of SS Master in the Education Department. Therefore, he is not entitled to count the service rendered in Judicial Department. It was also contended that petitioner took voluntary retirement and his application for the post of SS Master was not routed through proper channel, namely, through the District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 4 and S have also filed statement of objections wherein it is stated that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have no objection to give appropriate relief to the petitioner. An extract of reply statement is reproduced hereunder: - -

(3.) In other words, they are not resisting the claim of the petitioner. The facts are undisputed that the petitioner rendered service in the Judicial Department for the period from 12.9.1981 to 15.1.1987. At this juncture, the State counsel cannot contend that selection and appointment of the petitioner to the post of SS Master in the Education Department is not through proper channel and so also without permission of the District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak. That too when the District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak has not disputed the aforesaid contentions. Insofar as contention of the learned State counsel that the petitioner took voluntary retirement, therefore, he is not entitled to count the service, in this regard, the State counsel has not pointed out any provision which prohibits for counting past service rendered in a different Department. Learned counsel for the State further contended that the petitioner has resigned the post of Assistant Ahlmad on 15.01.1987, therefore, under Rule 3.17(b) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume -II, the service rendered by the petitioner in the Judicial Department cannot be counted. Rule 3.17(b) deals with Central and State Government whereas the petitioner herein was not working in the Central Government. On the contrary, he was working in the Judicial Department which is one of the State Government Department. Therefore. Rule 3.17(b) is not applicable to the petitioner's case.