OM PRAKASH VASHIST Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy herein is in a very narrow compass. The admitted facts reveal that the petitioner joined service as Class IV employee with State of Haryana on 27-5-1972 and sought voluntary retirement on 18-3-1994 vide letter Annexure R-1. On receipt of request, as referred to above, prompt came an order dated 31-3-1994 (Annexure P1) which reads thus :-

(2.) It is common case of the parties that the petitioner did not carry out his job any further and stood prematurely retired. However, when he claimed post retiral benefits, the petitioner was confronted with the situation that he did not have qualifying service to earn the pension, the same being less than 20 years. If one is to go by the date of joining and the date of which the petitioner sought voluntary retirement, the period comes to about 22 years. In the written statement filed by respondent it has, however been averred that the petitioner remained on leave for a total period of 768 days from time to time spanned over his service career of 22 years. The details of the period, the petitioner remained on leave have been given in the written statement. If one is to calculate after deducting this period of 768 days from the period the petitioner spent in service from May 1972 to March 1994, it is the case of the respondent State that the same will work out to 19 years 6 months and 24 days. The petitioner, thus, not having qualifying service of 20 years has been denied post retiral benefits.

(3.) Mr. Dhingra, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that when petitioner applied for leave and the same was sanctioned for the period referred to in the written statement, he was never conveyed that the same shall not be treated as service rendered by him for the purposes of pension and further that once the respondent State had accepted request for voluntary retirement of the petitioner by specifically saying in the order that pension papers have been received and are being sent for sanction thereof to a competent authority they cannot turn around now to say that the petitioner did not have qualifying service to earn post retiral benefits.