Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 15987 of 2008. (O.A. No. 3022/2007) Date of Decision : 14.07. 2011. H.R. Arya, I.F.S. (Retd.) …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. H.K. Paul, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India for respondent No.4. Surinder Singh, J. (Oral): The present Original Application was filed by the petitioner in the State Administrative Tribunal. After its abolition, it was transferred to this Court and registered as CWP(T) No.15987/2008. 2. The main reliefs prayed by the petitioner are as follows:- “A). The respondents may kindly be directed to count the service rendered by the applicant in the Agriculture Department of the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh for the period from 12.11.1962 to 07.09.1963 for the purposes of pension and other retiral benefits - 2 - and workout the pension and other retiral benefits accordingly in the interest of law and justice. B). That the action of the respondents in not counting the aforesaid period as qualifying service may kindly be held to be wrong and illegal. The decision of respondent No.1 contained in Annexures A-6 and A-8 including any other decision denying such benefit to the applicant may kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice. ” 3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition can be stated thus. The petitioner herein, admittedly rendered regular service from 12.11.1962 to 07.09.1963 in the Department of Agriculture of the State in his capacity as the Agriculture Sub-Inspector and also Research Assistant. His service was also duly verified by the Plant-Pathologist of the department. He applied to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for appointment against the post of the District Forest Officer, got selected and joined the Forest service on 01.04.1965. At that time Himachal Pradesh was Union Territory, it was granted full-fledged status as a State, on 25.01.1971 and then his service came under the State. Thereafter, the petitioner was inducted in the ‘Indian Forest Services’ and ultimately retired on 30.04.1996 on attaining the age of superannuation. His main grouse is that, his previous service rendered in the Agriculture - 3 - Department was not counted for the purpose of pension and other retiral benefits, despite making representation, which were wrongly turned down vide Annexures A-6 and A-8 by a non speaking order. 4. The respondent-State in its reply took shelter of Rule 28 (b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 which to my mind is not applicable, in the present fact situation whereas, respondent No.4- Union of India while quoting Rule 8 for All India Services ((DCRB) Rules, 1958 read with Rule 18 and also decision No.18 below the Rule, submitted that the State Governments themselves may process such cases in consultation with the authorities concerned and issue necessary orders. 5. In paras No.4.1 and 4.2 of the reply filed by Union of India respondent contended as under: “4.1 In terms of the All India Services (DCRB) Rules, 1958, in regard to the issues relating to counting of service rendered under the Central Government or a State Government by a member of an All India Service before his appointment to the All India Service as qualifying service for pension, Rule 8 is relevant and is extracted below. 8. Qualifying service. (1) Unless provided otherwise in these rules, qualifying service of a member of the Service for purposes of these Rules - 4 - begins from the date of his substantive appointment to the Service: Provided that in the case of a member of the Service appointed initially on probation the period of probation shall also count as qualifying service. (2) Any period of service under the Central or a State Government rendered by a member of the Service prior to his appointment to the Service shall count as qualifying service under these rules to the extent to which such service would have counted as qualifying service for pension under the rules applicable to him prior to his appointment to the Service provided that the service is otherwise continuous. Provided that temporary or officiating service, followed without interruption by confirmation in the same or another post, shall count in full as qualifying service except in respect of periods of temporary or officiating service in non-pensionable establishment. 4.2 It is further submitted that in terms of Govt. of India decision under Rule 8 of the All India Services (DCRB) Rules, 1958, it has been clarified that it is the State Government on whose cadre the officers is borne who has to decide the issue of counting the previous service rendered by a member of the service as qualifying service for pension. The relevant Govt. of India decision under Rule 8 of the All India Services (DCRB) Rules, 1958, is extracted below. (18) According to the provisions contained in sub- rule (2) to (6) of Rule 8 of the All India Services (DCRB) Rules, 1958, service rendered by a member of an All India Service before his appointment to the service under the Central Government or a State Government will count as qualifying service for pension subject to the fulfillment of the conditions - 5 - laid down therein. Requests have been received from a few members of the Indian Administration Service for counting the service rendered by them under the Central Government and/or a State Government before their appointment to the IAS as qualifying service for pension. Under rule 8 ibid Approval of the Central Government is not necessary for counting the previous service rendered by a member of the service as qualifying service for pension, provided the conditions laid down therein are satisfied. In such cases the Government of the State on whose cadre the officer is borne/the Accountant General concerned will have to take necessary action in consultation with the Central ministry/Department or the State Government concerned, if the officer had worked under the Central Government or another State Government, as the case may be, before joining the All India Services, to count such service as qualifying service for pension under rule 8 ibid. The State Governments were, requested that in future requests made by members of all India Services for counting the previous service rendered by them as qualifying service under rule 8 ibid need not be forwarded to the Central Government; the State Governments themselves may process such cases in consultation with the authorities concerned and issue necessary orders. If any clarification is required or condonation of break in service is involved a reference may be to the Department of Personnel & AR in the case of members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Police Division of the Ministry of Home Affairs in the case of members of the Indian Police Service and the Department of Agriculture in the case of members of the Indian Forest Service. - 6 - [DP & AR letter No.25011/43/80-AIS (II), dated the 9th January, 1981.].” 6. Thus the issue is required to be decided by the State Government as the petitioner was borne on the cadre of State Government. Since no such procedure as referred above was adopted and the reasons for rejecting the claim were not furnished, therefore, non- speaking orders Annexures A-6 and A-8 giving no reasons for its rejection are unsustainable, thus quashed and set aside and in view of the reply filed by the Union of India as quoted above, the respondent-State is hereby directed to process the matter of the petitioner within four months positively from the date of producing the copy of judgment/order of this Court, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 7. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms so as to application, if any. Copy Dasti. 14th July, 2011. (Surinder Singh), k.sharma Judge.