RANJEET SINGH Vs. GOVT. OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case pertains to the pensionery benefits. The case set up by the petitioners is that petitioner No.1 and late husband of petitioner No.2 were earlier appointed in the Government Transport Undertaking and subsequently came to be transferred to respondent No.2-Corporation. It is case of the petitioners that employees of the Government Transport Undertaking were given option either to continue as Government employees or to remain employees of the J&K State Road Transport Corporation i.e. respondent No.2. According to the petitioners, they along with similar other employees were not given the benefit of exercising the option, consequently they along with other employees of respondent No.2-Corporation approached this Court through the medium of SWP No.3082/2010 titled "All J&K Workers Union, State Road Transport Corporation vs. State of J&K and others" seeking retiral benefits and exercise of their option to be treated as Government servants for the purpose of pensionery and allied benefits. The said writ petition came to be allowed on 1/7/2013 and LPA No.87/2014 filed against the said judgment was dismissed as withdrawn on 12/6/2014. The petitioners herein including other petitioners, who had filed the aforesaid writ petition, filed a contempt petition and pursuant to the subsequent directions passed by this Court, the petitioners were given the pensionery benefits.

(2.) It is further case of the petitioners that Government Notification (SRO 193) dtd. 24/4/2018 came to be issued thereby fixing the pay and regulation of annual increments as per the procedure under the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Revised) Pay Rues, 2018, and this Notification (SRO 193) came to be applied to the employees of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Sector Undertakings including the J&K State Road Transport Corporation in view of Government Order No.278-F of 2018 dtd. 6/6/2018. It is submission of the petitioners that in the case of most of the employees, who were petitioners in the aforesaid petition, the fixation had already been made, however, the petitioners and four other employees of the respondent No.2-Corporation, who were similarly situated, were to be granted the pay fixation as per the aforesaid SRO 193 read with Government Order No.278F of 2018. The said four persons similarly situated with the petitioners were also granted the revision of pension in view of Revision Pay Authorization letters in their favour.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioners is that they have been left out and in their case, respondent No.3 sought information whether the Board of Directors has approved adoption of the Rules in respect of the employees who retired on or after 01.012016, which, according to the petitioners, runs in contradiction to the settled principles of equity, fair play and good conscience as respondent No.3 has to consider that petitioners are the employees of the Government and are to be governed by the aforesaid rules as maximum employees, who are members of respondent No.2-Corporation and were petitioners in the aforesaid writ petition, have already been given the benefit and petitioners herein could not be singled out.