HADI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this case relates to the proportionate pensionary liability of the Government of Bihar. The petitioner, a former employee of the Government of Bihar, seeks direction upon the respondents to calculate final pension taking into account the service rendered by him under the Government of Bihar from 16-9-1946 to 28-2-1955.

(2.) The facts of the case are not in dispute. Shortly stated, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Marketing Inspector at Regional Grain Supply Office, Gaya in the service of the Government of Bihar on 16-9-1946. The Regional Grain Supply Office was merged with the Supply and Control Department under the Collector, Gaya and the service of the petitioner was transferred alongwith other employees to it In the year 1952, Government of India, Department of Food, opened Central Storage Depots at Gaya and other places i the State of Bihar under the management of State Government through the Collector of the District. These godowns were managed by staff then working in the Supply and Control Department. The petitioner was one of them. In the year 1954 Supply and Control Department of the Government of Bihar handed over the Management to the Government of India. Accordingly, Storage Depots of the Supply and Control Department, which were managed by the State Government till 28-2-1955 were taken over by Government of India with effect from 1-3-1955. It is relevant to mention here that the transfer of services of the employees was on the basis of option. The petitioner opted for the Central Government service. After scrutiny etc. his option was accepted and he was directed to join as Junior Godown Keeper, Gaya Central Storage Depot under the Central Government on 23-2-1955. The petitioner joined the said post of Junior Godown Keeper on 1-3-1955. In course of time he was confirmed on the post and deputed to the Food Corporation of India. In terms of Section 12-A of the Food Corporation Act, 1964, he became employee of the Food Corporation of India. He superannuated from service on the post of Assistant Manager on 31-12-1982. After his superannuation his pension etc. were computed counting his service from the date of his joining under the Central Government i.e. 1-3-1995. The service rendered by him under the Government of Bihar from 16-9-1946 to 28-2-1955 was not counted. On 19-5-1999 the Deputy Manager (P) FCI sent his Service Book/Leave Account to Under Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies Department, Government of Bihar, for sanction of pension for the service rendered by the petitioner under Government of Bihar, but no action was taken. Finally, after the petitioner served legal notice on 30-10-2001 he was informed through his Advocate that as the service rendered by him under the Government of Bihar was less than ten years pro rata pension was not admissible.

(3.) It is not in dispute that in terms of Rule 145 of the Bihar Pension Rules service of less than ten year does not qualify for pension. The case of the petitioner is that in terms of Circular No. 3(20)/Pen(A)/79 dated 31-3-1982 of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms the Government of Bihar is liable to proportionate pension to the extent of the service rendered by him under it and therefore, the period from 16-9-1946 to 28-2-1955 cannot be excluded while calculating his pension. It is said that in the case of one Managal Sinha, the State Government agreed to count the service rendered by him under it though the period of service was less than ten years, vide Memo No. 1808 dated 7- 5-1994 of the Food, Supply & Commerce Department. Said Mangal Sinha finally filed a writ petition before this Court, CWJC No. 827/95, in which his claim was allowed and placing reliance on the said Circular of the Government of India dated 31-3-1982 he was held entitled to count the period of service under the State Government with respect to which Government of Bihar was held liable to share the pensionary liability.