USHA RANI THAKRAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the claim of the petitioner is that her service which she rendered from 5/11/1973 to 24/6/1996 in Yashoda Co-Educational High School, Hisar-respondent no. 3 should be treated as a qualifying service for computing her pensionary benefits.

(2.) As per the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed as S.S. Mistress on a sanctioned post in respondent No. 3 School on 05/11/1973. It is an admitted position that respondent No. 3 School is a Government Aided School and 95% grant-in-aid was being given by the Government of Haryana. While the petitioner was working with respondent No. 3 School, the respondent-State of Haryana issued an advertisement for appointment to the post of Principal. The petitioner, who was fully eligible, applied in pursuance to the said advertisement through proper channel on 7/9/1993 and ultimately was selected as such and was appointed as a Principal with the Department of Education, Government of Haryana. In pursuance to the selection, the petitioner was relieved from respondent No. 3 School on 25/6/1996 and she joined on the same day with the Department of Education, Government of Haryana at Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Agroha, Hisar.

(3.) Petitioner kept on working as a Principal till she superannuated on 30/11/2011. After her retirement, only the service, which the petitioner rendered from 25/6/1996 till 30/11/2011 with the Department of Education, Government of Haryana has been taken into account as a qualifying service for the purpose of granting the pensionary benefits to the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the petitioner is entitled for computing whole of the service as a qualifying service for the grant of pensionary benefits including the service which she rendered with respondent No. 3 School from 05/11/1973 till 24/6/1996. Petitioner had made representations for the said purpose to the respondents but the same were rejected initially on 26/2/2013 (Annexure P-8) and thereafter once again on 9/12/2013 (Annexure P-10). These orders are under challenge in the present writ petition.