RAM CHANDRA PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution by one Shri Ram Chandra Purohit who was formerly a member of the Rajasthan Educational Service and came to be absorbed in the University of Rajasthan service consequent to transfer of certain Government Colleges to the University. The petitioner prays : (1) that the respondents be directed to pay him compensation pension according to the rules with effect from 10-7-63, (2) in the alternative the respondents be directed to pay pension to the petitioner on attaining the age of 55 years on the basis of the emoluments to be drawn by him during the three years immediately preceding the attainment of the age of 55 years while in the University service, and (3) directing the State to pay the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioner immediately for being credited to his Provident Fund Account in the University.

(2.) THE petitioner joined the service of the Rajasthan State on 21-3-52 as a Lecturer in Hindi on being selected by the Raj. Public Service Commission. His date of birth was 5-6-1923. In April, 1962 the Government decided to transfer three of its Colleges namely, Maharaja's College, Maharani's College and Commerce College, at Jaipur to the University of Rajasthan. THE modus operandi for the transfer of the staff was that the teaching staff attached to these Colleges was to be treated on deputation with the University for some time and then the University was to appoint a Selection Committee for the appointment of Professors, Readers & Lecturers in the University. THE members of the Raj Edu. Service fulfilling certain qualifications were to be screened and then selected on posts under the University. All the posts under the Govt. an which Professors, Readers & Lecturers were working in these three Colleges were to be taken as abolished and a corresponding number of supernumerary posts for the teaching staff on deputation were to be created. THE supernumerary posts too were to come to an end as and when the person holding his lien on such post be permanently absorbed in the University service or would be retiring or cease to be in service otherwise. THE terms of the transfer were settled and option was to be given to the teaching staff employed in these three Colleges whether they would like to remain in Government service or would like to go under the University. THE petitioner avers that when his option was invited he opted for the service of the University and was eventually selected for appointment under the University. THE petitioner was substantively appointed in the University as a Lecturer with effect from 10-7-63 and from that date his lien on a supernumerary post came to an end. THE petitioner claims that in terms of the Government order dated 7-7-62 since he had opted for the University service and he having put in more than 10 years' service but less then 25 years' service he was entitled to the payment of proportionate pension from the date he ceased to be in Government service. THE petitioner takes the stand that the Government order dated 7-7-62 makes a reference to the Rules (Rajasthan Service Rules) for payment of proportionate pension and accordingly he was entitled to get the propartionate pension with effect from 10-7-63. In the alternative the petitioner contends that even if it is held that in terms of the Government order dated 7-7-62 he is found entitled to receive the pension on his attaining the age of 55 years, the Pension should be determined on the basis of the average pay of three years immediately preceding the attainment of the age of 55 years (the notional date of retirement) for purposes of payment of Pension and not on the basis of the pay that the petitioner was drawing on 10-7-63 when his lien in Government service came to on end. He further contends that he was entitled to receive the gratuity an his release from Government service and the same should have been credited to the University account.