C.W.P. No.3633 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.3633 of 1998 DATE OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Satya Pal .....PETITIONER Versus The State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN --- Present: Mr. R.S. Sangwan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Chahal, Addl. A.G., Haryana. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner, who has retired as driver from Haryana Roadways, Rewari, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to re-fix his pension, after taking into consideration 4 years, 10 months and 15 days of military service rendered by him during the emergency from 25.2.1963 to 10.1.1968 under the Punjab National Emergency Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as `the Rules'), towards his pension, and the arrears of pension be paid to him accordingly. Undisputedly, the petitioner was enrolled in Indian Army on 25.2.1963. He was discharged from the Army on 31.8.1979. Thereafter, he joined as driver in Haryana Roadways (a civil post under the Haryana Government) on 24.1.1980 from where he was compulsorily retired w.e.f. C.W.P. No.3633 of 1998 -2- 10.11.1997. It is also admitted position that the military service rendered by the petitioner during the emergency, i.e., 25.2.1963 to 10.1.1968 was counted towards seniority and other service benefits, except pension, in view of Rule 4 of the Rules. However, the said service was not taken into consideration while fixing the pension of the petitioner as he had not refunded or deposited the gratuity amount, which he had received from the military authorities, with the State Government in terms of Clause 2 of Rule 4 of the Rules. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents very fairly conceded that though in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in Raja Ram v. The State of Haryana and others, (CWP No.16474 of 1995, decided on February 27, 1996) and the Full Bench decision of this Court in Rajender Kumar, SI v. The State of Haryana and others, 1992(2) PLR 754 and in terms of Rule 4 of the Rules, the petitioner is entitled for counting the military service rendered by him during the period of emergency towards increments, seniority and pension, but since the petitioner has not deposited the amount of gratuity, which he had received from the military authorities, with the State Government, he was denied the benefit of the said period while calculating his pension after his retirement. He states that if the petitioner deposits the said amount within a period of one month, the respondents will re-consider the claim of the petitioner and grant the benefit of the said period to him towards the pension also, and thereafter, his pension will be re-fixed accordingly and the arrears will be paid to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will deposit the amount of gratuity, received by him from the military C.W.P. No.3633 of 1998 -3- authorities, with the State Government within a period of one month. In view of the aforesaid legal and factual position, and the statements made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to re-consider the claim of the petitioner while re-fixing his pension, subject to deposit of the gratuity amount, received by the petitioner from the military authorities, within a period of one month. While re-fixing the pension of the petitioner, the respondents shall take into account the military service rendered by him during the emergency, i.e., 25.2.1963 to 10.1.1968. The respondents will also pay the arrears of pension to the petitioner within a period of three months' thereafter. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 21, 2010 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) vkg JUDGE