KANTI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff have preferred this intra-court appeal against the judgment dated 21. 11. 1990 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil First Appeal No. 31/1988, whereby the learned Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiffs and maintained the judgment and decree dated 22. 12. 1987 passed by the District Judge, Sirohi in Civil Suit No. 22/1971, whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiffs for recovery of the alleged arrears of salary, pension and gratuity of late Tara Chand Dosi was partly decreed only towards the amount of pension and gratuity against the defendant No. 1 State of Rajasthan and rest of the claim was disallowed.

(2.) THE plaintiff appellants are heirs of late Tara Chand Dosi who was an Assistant Engineer in the erstwhile State of Sirohi having initially entered the service on 4. 7. 1918. An order appointing him Assistant Engineer, Abu Road was passed on 22. 1. 1948. While he continued to serve as such, on 8. 11. 1948, the then Sirohi State entered into a merger agreement with the Government of India. THE administration of merged Sirohi State was handed over to the then State of Bombay on the eve of commencement of the Constitution of India. However, certain territories in the State of Sirohi of Pindwara, Reodar and Bhawari were not taken over by the State of Bombay and the administration thereof was handed over to the then Government of United State of Rajasthan by a notification dated 24. 1. 1950 under the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947.

(3.) THE claim so made by the plaintiffs was contested by the defendants primarily on the grounds that the headquarter of late Tara Chand Dosi continued at Abu Road and no orders were passed by the Rajasthan Government for changing of the headquarter. On 2. 3. 1950, an order was issued by the Administrator of Abu and Abu Road area asking for the options from the employees about their desire to be absorbed in Rajasthan or Bombay and in pursuance thereof late Tara Chand submitted the option seeking absorption in Bombay province and, therefore, he was serving under the Bombay Province and the Bombay Government relieved him from services on 31. 5. 1950. He was never absorbed in the services in Rajasthan State and, therefore, claim on the basis of the retirement on attaining the age of 60 years on 31. 5. 1955 was entirely baseless. It was also pointed out that late Shri Dosi was relieved as back as on 31. 5. 1950 by the Bombay State and he had expired on 17. 1. 1960 and the suit filed by the plaintiffs was hopelessly barred by limitation.