SUNIL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner becoming aggrieved, by, the making of Annexure A-3, wherethrough he was denied pensionary benefits, has, hence instituted the instant petition before this Court, wherethroughs he casts an onslaught thereon. Initially the petitioner was appointed, as, a Medical Officer on, a contract basis. His afore appointment, on a contract basis, was made on 27.5.2000. However, his services became regularized, in, the afore capacity, in, the year 2007.

(2.) Mr. Hemanshu Mishra, learned Additional Advocate General, has, made strenuous efforts to validate the afore impugned Annexure, however, his attempt is feeble, and, is squarely benumbed by a decision rendered by this Court, in, a case titled as Joga Singh and others versus State of H.P and others and connected matters,2015 3 HimLR 1611 (DB), relevant paragraph 11 whereof, stands extracted hereinafter, (a) wherein it has been firmly expostulated, hence, upon making, an, interpretation of rule 13, of, the Central Civil Services (pension) Rules 1972, encapsulating therein, the, definition of qualifying service, vis-a-vis, entitlements towards pension (b) qua the period(s) of service rendered prior to 15.5.2003 whether on, a, contractual, temporary or adhoc capacity by, the appointee concerned, under, the government concerned, when becomes succeeded by regularization thereons, (c) thereupon the afore preceding uninterrupted period(s) of afore service(s) vis-a-vis regularization, stand declared, to, become reckonable as qualifying service, and, the appointee becomes declared, to, be entitled to receive pension. Since in tandem therewith the petitioner, though, was initially appointed, on, a contractual basis prior, to, 2003, yet, when he rendered uninterrupted service, in, the afore capacity, up to, his regularization in the year 2007, hence obviously he becomes entitled, to, the ratio propounded, in, the afore judgment, moreso, when it has become affirmed, by, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 22298/2015, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and others versus Joga Singh and ors.

(3.) In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed alongwith all consequential benefits, and, the impugned Annexure A-3 is quashed and set aside. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.