C.W.P. No.18297 of 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.18297 of 1996 Date of Decision: 13.2.2008 Darbara Singh and another .....Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and others ...Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr.J.S.Maanipur, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Ajay Chaudhary, DAG, Haryana. ... RAJIVE BHALLA, J The petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to count the services rendered by them in a private organisation, prior to their absorption on regular basis in the services of the State of Haryana i.e. Haryana Roadways for computation of pensionary benefits. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were regular employees of private transport companies. The State of Haryana nationalised the transport sector, thus, leading to a large scale retrenchment of employees working in the transport companies etc. In order to overcome this hardship, the State of Haryana, absorbed these employees, including the petitioners, as regular employees of the Haryana Roadways. The petitioners, in essence, pray that the services rendered by them in private organisation, prior to their absorption in the Haryana Roadways, be considered for purposes of calculating benefits of pension and other C.W.P. No.18297 of 1996 2 superannuatory benefits like gratuity etc. It is further asserted that a similar controversy, with respect to similarly situated employees absorbed in the Haryana Roadways, came up for consideration before this Court in CWP No.15088 of 1990 (Madan Lal and others V. State of Haryana and others). Vide order dated 24.9.1993, the said writ petition was allowed and a direction was issued to the respondents, to compute the entire period of service of the petitioners, including services rendered by them in private organisation while determining their pensionary and superannuatory benefits. Thereafter L.P.A. No.89 of 1984 filed against the aforementioned judgement was also dismissed on 19.8.1996 as was S.L.P. No.(C)1992-93 of 1995 in CWP No.16358 of 1990 Counsel for the respondents, however, asserts that even though a similar controversy may have been decided in favour of employees of Haryana Roadways, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in matter pertaining to the Haryana State Electricity Board, where employees working in Kaithal Electricity Supply Company were absorbed, dismissed their plea for grant of a similar relief. It is, therefore, submitted that in this view of the matter, the present writ petition be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order. In my considered opinion, the controversy in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court rendered in Madan Lal and others V. State of Haryana and others (CWP No.15088 of 1990). A perusal of the said judgement discloses that the petitioners were employees of private transport companies, rendered jobless after nationalisation of the transport sector in the State of Haryana. In order to overcome their C.W.P. No.18297 of 1996 3 hardship, the State of Haryana, absorbed all such employees in the Haryana Roadways. The petitioners in the said writ petition approached the High Court, with a plea that services rendered by them in private organisation, be counted towards pensionary and other superannuatory benefits. Their plea was allowed and a direction was issued to the respondents to count service rendered in private organisation. The writ petition was allowed and the said order was challenged by the State of Haryana by way of LPA, which was dismissed, as was the SLP. I find no distinguishing feature, as would distinguish the case of the petitioners from the judgement of this Court rendered in CWP No.15088 of 1990. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to compute the entire period of service of the petitioners, including the service rendered by them in private organisation for determining their pensionary and superannuatory benefits. In case, any arrears of pension are to be paid to the petitioners, they would not be entitled to interest. The arrears, if any, payable to the petitioners shall be granted within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 13.2.2008 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE