DEVI SARAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief: -

(2.) AS a matter of fact, the petitioner was initially appointed on daily -wages in the H.P. Forest Department and transferred to respondent No. 3 Forest Corporation w.e.f. 8.6.1978. Thereafter he was absorbed in the Forest Corporation on and w.e.f. 14. 8. 1986. On 1.4.1999 3rd respondent introduced the Pension Scheme and the petitioner opted for it. On attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner retired from the service on 29.2.2004.

(3.) THE petitioner retired on 29.2.2004 but he was denied this benefit despite having opted for it. Since the case of the petitioner is covered matter in principal by the judgment of the Principal Division Bench of this Court passed in LPA No. 346 of 2011, supra, therefore, I see no reason to deny the similar benefits to the petitioner. Hence the relief sought is allowed. However, it is made clear that there cannot be double benefits. The entire benefits under the EPF Scheme received by him shall be refunded and thereafter, the case of the petitioner will be processed by the respondent Corporation for granting pension to him, as per Scheme mentioned in the prayer clause supra and appropriate action, without discriminating the petitioner, will be taken within three months from the date of the refund. In view of the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.