JAGAT PAL Vs. H P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to the present petition are somewhat queer and baffling as well. THE father of the petitioner, late Shri Sohan Lal, who shall hereinafter be referred as the deceased employee, had initially joined employment of the respondent-board as Peon on 02.05.1968 and was subsequently promoted as Bill Distributor w.e.f. 18.05.1974. It shall be pertinent to observe at this juncture that both these posts are Class-IV posts for which age of retirement is 60 years.

(2.) SINCE the date of birth of the deceased employee was 24.05.1945, had he not been promoted to a Class-III post, he would have retired at the age of 60 years on and w.e.f. 24.05.2005. However, strangely enough, the process for promotion of the deceased employee as Ferro Printer/Gastetner Operator, a Class-III Post for which the retirement age is 58 years, was initiated at the fag end of his service career. Consequently, he was promoted as such vide Office Order dated 06.09.2003, Annexure A-1, when he had already crossed the age of 58 years and on the basis of which he was retired from service on and w.e.f. 30.09.2003 as per Annexure A-2. Unfortunately, the deceased employee died soon thereafter on 10.10.2003. Consequently, representations, Annexures A-3 and A-4, were submitted by the wife of the deceased employee to the Chairman of the respondent-board with a prayer for grant of employment to her son, the petitioner, on compassionate grounds on the premise that had the deceased employee not been promoted to the Class-III post of Ferro Printer- cum-Gastetner Operator, he would not have retired from service on and w.e.f. 30.09.2003 which also on the face of it was beyond attaining the age of 58 years and had instead continued in service up to the age of 60 years, i.e. 20.05.2005:

(3.) IN reply to MA No. 2763 of 2007 in O.A. No. 2381 of 2004, filed on behalf of the petitioner for interim directions, the respondents have stated as under: