VIJAY KUMARI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was recommended for appointment with the District Rural Development Agency, Bilaspur against the post of Steno-typist by Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission in a selection process undertaken by it in the year 1986 for filling up regular posts of Steno-typists in various Departments of State of Himachal Pradesh, through direct recruitment. Pursuant to her selection as a Steno-typist, petitioner was assigned to District Rural Development Agency, Bilaspur. Though the petitioner has claimed that her aforesaid assignment to the District Rural Development Agency is not on the basis of any specific criteria, rather same was on the basis of pick and choose method adopted by the Public Service Commission, but since, no challenge, if any, to the aforesaid method adopted by Public Service Commission ever 'came to be laid, as such, it has lost its relevance, as far as present proceedings are concerned. Petitioner has averred in the petition that at the time of her aforesaid appointment, she genuinely believed that pursuant to her selection as a Stenotypist against regular post advertised by Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, she would be sent to State Department and she will have the benefits at par with others selected in the selection process. She has averred that the requisition, Annexure P-2 sent by the DRDA was not in her knowledge at the time of appointment but, as has been observed herein above, since the petitioner, pursuant to her aforesaid selection, accepted her appointment in the office of DRDA, Bilaspur and thereafter continued to work in the same organisation till the time of merger of DRDA borne staff in the Rural Development Department, it is not open for her to rake up the aforesaid issue at this belated stage. Staff of Rural Development Agency in the State was merged with the Rural Development Department, whereby services of the petitioner also came to be merged with the said Department vide communication dated 29.9.2012 (Annexure P-10). It clearly emerges from the record that vide Notification dated 28.9.2012 (Annexure P-11) DRDA borne staff was merged on permanent basis in the Rural Development Department and as per said Notification officials so merged are/were to be placed at the bottom of the respective grade/cadre and their seniority was to be determined on the basis of their merger whereas, pensionary benefits are/were to be regulated as per instructions of the State Government issued vide FD's letter No. Fin(Pen)A(3)-1/96 dated 15.5.2003 and as per provisions of HP Civil services Contributory Pension Rules, 2006. It stands specifically mentioned in the instructions dated 28.9.2012 (Annexure P-11) that after merger, only those officials, who were entitled to regular pay scale shall fall under the provisions of new pension scheme. besides above, options of the officials were also called accepting terms and conditions, from all the concerned employees and petitioner also consented for the same as is evident from Annexure R-1 annexed with the reply filed by respondents Nos. 1 to 3.

(2.) Now, the precise prayer as has been made in the instant petition by the petitioner is that her entire service with effect from 27.2.1987 may be taken into consideration for seniority and pension alongwith consequential benefits and she be held entitled to pension under old scheme after her superannuation.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court finds that though in the year 1986, petitioner participated in the selection process undertaken by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission for filling up regular posts of Steno-typists in various Departments of the State through direct recruitment but, it is also a matter of fact that the petitioner, after having been selected, was assigned to District Rural Development Agency, Bilaspur. Petitioner happily accepted the job in the year 1987 as is evident from Annexure P-3 and thereafter, at no point of time, raked up the issue with regard to her wrong assignment to DRDA, where she continued to work uninterruptedly without break, till her merger in the Rural Development Department vide Notification dated 29.9.2012. Perusal of aforesaid office order dated 29.9.2012 clearly reveal that DRDA borne staff was ordered to be merged on permanent basis in Rural Development Department as per terms and conditions contained in the aforesaid Notification, which specifically provides that the DRDA borne staff shall be placed at the bottom of their respective cadre/grade and their seniority shall be fixed on the basis of merger and pensionary benefits shall regulated as per Notification dated 15.5.2003 and as per provisions of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services Contributory Pension Scheme issued vide Notification dated 17.8.2006.