YOGESH KUMAR KAUL Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the petitioner is for settlement of his pension case and also for release of other post retiral benefits like gratuity, GP Fund etc. The petitioner also claims interest @ 12% p.a. on the amounts allegedly withheld by the respondents.

(2.) Briefly put, the facts as narrated in the writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Clerk in the Revenue Department vide Order No.3551-55/Est dated 24.03.1974 and was adjusted by the Division Commissioner, Kashmir in Circle Office Hajan, Baramulla. The petitioner joined his duties on 19.01.1974. Vide Govt. Order No.Rev (NG) 200 of 1978 dated 01.08.1978, the petitioner was transferred on deputation to the Road Transport Corporation. While the petitioner was serving in the SRTC, he was promoted in the Corporation against different posts from time to time and eventually retired on superannuation on 31.04.2009 as Joint Managing Director of the Corporation. It is stated that at the time of conversion of the erstwhile Govt. Transport Undertaking (GTU for short) into the J &K State Road Transport Corporation (SRTC for short), all the employees, who were working in the erstwhile GTU were asked to opt either for the Corporation services or to retain their status as Government servant. It is claimed that the petitioner was already a Government employee of the Revenue Department and was in the Corporation on deputation and, therefore, opted for availing the benefits of Government service. It is, thus, contended by the petitioner that since he continued to be a Government servant having not opted for Corporation service, he is entitled to payment of pension and other post retiral benefits as are admissible in the case of a Government employee. The petitioner claims that he made several requests and representations to the respondents for treating him also a beneficiary in terms of Government Order No.38-GR (TR) of 1986 dated 03.10.1986, but the respondents have not acceded to the request and have retired him as an employee of the Corporation releasing in his favour only post retiral benefits admissible to the employees of the Corporation. In this factual backdrop, the petitioner has filed the instant petition and prayed for the relief claimed in the writ petition.

(3.) The respondents, i.e., Department of Transport of the State Government as also the SRTC have filed their separate objections. The reliefs claimed by the petitioner have been opposed by the respondents on the grounds that the petitioner was an employee of the Revenue Department and was serving in the Corporation on deputation. He was granted promotions from time to time in the Corporation and ultimately retired on 30.04.2009 as Joint Managing Director of the Corporation. It is submitted that as per clause (I) and clause (IV) of the Rule 52 of the J &K Civil Service Regulations, the period of deputation in any case cannot be accede 3 years which, however, on the request of borrowing agency can be extended to a maximum of 4 years. The petitioner remained in the Corporation beyond the aforesaid period and therefore, overstayed his deputation. That being so, the petitioner who was supposed to report back to his parents department after completing the maximum tenure of four years of the deputation, ceased to be the employee of the Government when he failed to so report back. It is submitted that the petitioner while serving in the Corporation not only got the promotions in the Corporation and rose to the position of Joint Managing Director but had also contributed in the Corporation towards Compensatory Provident Fund which goes to prove that the petitioner had accepted his position to be the permanent employee of the Corporation. Regarding the plea of the petitioner that like other Government employee of erstwhile GTU who had given option to be the employee of the Corporation or to remain Government employee was equally applicable to the petitioner, the respondents, in their objections, have stated that the petitioner was transferred on deputation in the Corporation in the year 1978 whereas the GTU had been converted to J &K SRTC in September, 1976 and that the Government order providing option to the employees of the GTU was only meant for the employees of the GTU and not to the employees of other departments like Revenue Department as is the case of petitioner.