STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. KAMLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these special appeals filed under Sec. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1948 are directed against the common judgment dated 29. 09. 1989, whereby 10 writ petitions had been allowed by the learned Single Judge holding the petitioners (respondents herein) to be also entitled to the payment of proportionate pension in accordance with rules in relation to the period covering the period from the date the petitioners ceased to be in Government service and were permanently absorbed in the University till they attained the age of 55 years. In two out of these ten cases i. e. in the case of Smt. Kamla wife of late Shri B. S. Mathur, and Smt. Kamla Sharma wife of Late Shri KG Sharma, they had filed the writ petitions as legal representatives of their husbands who were also the persons belonging to the same category, as the other eight petitioners. The learned single Judge gave further direction to the State Government to compute the said amount payable to each of the petitioners and pay the same within two months and in case of failure to pay the said amount within the period of two months, interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount.

(2.) THE respondents in these special appeals were employees of the State Government and on transfer of Government colleges to the University, the Government in consultation with the University, considered the question of absorption of the teaching staff working in these institutions in the University service. According to the decision of the State Government, the Director, College Education, Rajasthan addressed the letter dated 21. 04. 1962 to the members of the teaching staff in the college/educational institutions. In the said letter, it was stated that for recruitment to additional teaching post that were required by the University as a result of transfer/merger of the colleges, the University had agreed to hold screening for the post of Professors, Readers and Lecturers from amongst the Principals of Post-graduate and degree colleges, post-graduate heads of Department and Lecturers and the members of the education service and for making selection for the post of Professors and Readers seniority with due regard to merit and suitability will be taken into consideration and the selection to the post of Lecturer shall also be made on the same basis. According to this letter, the selection was to be made by a Committee consisting of Vice-Chancellor of the University, Secretary to the Government in the Education Department, Director of College Education, a Professor of the University in the subject concerned, a Senior Principal of post-graduate College in the State and Expert in the subject to be invited from outside Rajasthan and the Registrar of the University. As per the aforesaid letter dated 21. 04. 1962, the teaching staff of the colleges/educational institutions which were transferred to the University by the State Government in 1962 were classified in the following three categories: - 1. Persons who had put in 25 years of service or more, on the date of such transfer. 2. Persons who had put in less than 25 years of service, but had put in 10 years service on the date of such transfer. 3. Persons who had put in less than 10 years service on the date of such transfer.

(3.) BEFORE us, the impugned judgment dated 29. 09. 1989, has been assailed by Shri M. I. Khan, Addl. Advocate General on the basis that the learned Single Judge has wrongly interpreted Rules 215, 343 and 347 of RSR and that the dispute should have been decided by the learned Single Judge in terms of tripartite agreement and the contents of the tripartite agreement would over-ride the RSR and that the Rajasthan Service Rules do not apply in view of the said agreement and that the University fund is also being paid from the consolidated fund and is a part of the consolidated fund and, therefore, the directions for payment of pension for the period when the petitioners were in the regular employment in an autonomous body could not be given. Shri Mridul, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners i. e. respondents herein, has submitted that the cases have been decided on a correct interpretation of Rules 215,343 and 347, RSR and he has submitted that in case Rule 215 is read with Rule 343, it will be found that the petitioners were fully entitled to the pension as has been directed by the learned Single Judge. He has submitted that with the cessation or the petitioners from the Government service, they stood discharged from the Government service and the period of which they served in the University till they attained the age of 55 years could be treated as a case of re- employment. The submission of Shri Mridul was that it was only a case of deferred payment in terms of the agreement and the only effect of the agreement is that the pension could not be claimed before attaining the age of 55 years and even in terms of the agreement on which reliance was placed by the Government, the petitioners were entitled to pension for the period commencing from the date they ceased to be in the Government service and were absorbed in the University till attainment of the age of 55 years.