DULI CHAND Vs. HARYANA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, five writ petitions bearing CWP Nos. 10638 of 2016, 11797 of 2016, 24015 of 2016, 10659 of 2016 and 11352 of 2016 are being disposed of as common question of law and similar facts have been stated in all the writ petitions.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 11797 of 2016.

(3.) The grievance in the present writ petition as raised by the petitioners is that they were initially appointed in Haryana Minerals Limited and worked for substantial number of years. Thereafter, Haryana Minerals Limited was closed down and the petitioners were retrenched from Haryana Minerals Limited after which, they were appointed in various other Boards/Corporations or the State Undertaking in view of the Policy dtd. 7/1/2002 and continued working there till their retirement. Grievance of the petitioners is that the service, which they rendered with the Haryana Minerals Limited, was not being treated as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents that the service rendered by the petitioners in the Haryana Minerals Limited should be treated as a qualifying service for computing their pensionary benefits.