BALO DEVI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the claim of the petitioner is for taking into account the daily wage service as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits, which has been declined by the respondents vide impugned order dated 12.03.2015 (Annexure P-5). The prayer of the petitioner is for granting the petitioner the benefit of daily wage service, which the late husband of the petitioner had rendered from 01.01.1984 till 31.03.1996 by treating the same as a qualifying service.

(2.) The facts as mentioned in the writ petition are that the husband of the petitioner joined as a Temporary Beldar in the Office of Improvement Trust, Amritsar on 01.01.1984. He kept on working as such when his services were regularized by the respondents on 26.03.1996. After rendering continuous service, husband of the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2000. Respondents while calculating the pensionary benefits of the petitioner only treated the regular service as qualifying service and the daily wage service was not taken into account as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits. Husband of the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP No. 11674 of 2001 titled as Sat Guru Sharan Vs. State of Punjab and others, which was disposed of by this Court on 05.12.2013 (Annexure P-4) with a direction to decide the claim of the petitioner for the grant of benefit of daily wage service as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits. In pursuance to the said direction issued by this Court, the respondents passed an order on 12.03.2015 (Annexure P-5) declining the benefit of daily wage service rendered by the petitioner from 01.01.1984 till 31.03.1996 to be treated as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits. This order is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) Upon notice of motion, respondent No. 3 has filed the reply in which, no valid justification has been given as to why the daily wage service, which the late husband of the petitioner had rendered, cannot be taken into account as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits. The only reason assigned is that the regular service, which the late husband of the petitioner had rendered, has been taken into account and there is no provision to count the daily wage service as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits.