IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 307 (SS) OF 2004 Mr. Kishan Ram Arya, S/o Bachi Ram Arya, R/o Line No. 1 Rajpura Haldwani, District Nainital. ……………………Petitioner. Versus 1. State of U.P., through Transport Secretary, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow. 2. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Lucknow. 3. Chief General Manager (Sanchalan), Pariwahan Nigam, Pariwahan Bhawan, Lucknow. 4. Regional Manager, Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Kumaon Region, Nainital. …………Respondents. Mr. N.S. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3. Dated: 20.03.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant pension to the petitioner forthwith. Further prayer has been made for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay arrears of pension and other retiral benefits to the petitioner from the date of his retirement together with interest on the delayed payment. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Booking Clerk in the erstwhile U.P. Government Roadways vide 2 order dated 09.07.1964 in the pay-scale of Rs. 60-4-80 E.B.-4 by the General Manager U.P. Govt. Roadways Kumaon Region, Nainital. On 22.07.1970, the service of the petitioner was absorbed against the regular vacancy on the post of Booking Clerk and the name of the petitioner was at Serial No. 11o in the list, whose services have been absorbed against substantive vacancy. On 28.09.1979, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Traffic Inspector Grade-II in the pay scale of Rs. 200-320 by the Regional Manager U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Kumaon Region, Nainital. On 28.12.1983, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Traffic Inspector Grade –I by the Deputy Chief Manager (North Region) U.P.S.R.T.C., Bareilly. The post of Traffic Inspector Grade-I was designated as Traffic Inspector in the U.P.S.R.T.C. vide order dated 09.10.1985, which is a pensionable post. On 06.04.1989, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Station Incharge in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300. The Chief General Manager (Sanchalan), Nigam Headquarters Lucknow vide order dated 01.11.1996 promoted the petitioner on the post of Traffic Superintendent in the pay-scale of Rs. 1400-2600. On 09.09.2002 order was passed by the Chief General Manager (Sanchalan) Pariwahan Nigam Headquarters Lucknow stating therein that the petitioner will be retired from service on 31.03.2003 after attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years from the post of Traffic Superintendent. Petitioner retired from the post of Traffic Superintendent on 31.03.20003 after attaining the age of retirement. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner, who was on deputation with the Corporation and was a Govt. Servant for all purposes has retired from service w.e.f. 31.03.2003 and since he retired from traffic side, he has not 3 been granted any pensionery benefits where the employees who retired from the post of Junior Clerk were granted pensionary benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Civil Services Regulation 361 and 360 and 360-A also permits the employees of erstwhile U.P. Roadways for their retiral benefits. Petitioner has referred the G.O. No. 3000/XXX-82-170- N/72 dated 07.06.1972 as amended by G.O. No. 3014/XXX-2- 170-N/72 dated 05.07.1972, where it has been mentioned that the employees of erstwhile U.P. Govt. Roadways were to be treated as on deputation with the Corpration and will be entitled for all the pensionery benefits in spite of their absorption in the Corporation as if they were still in Govt. Service. Thus all the employees of erstwhile U.P. Govt. Roadways, holding permanent pensionable posts as per G.O. dated 28.10.1960 will be entitled to pension. Petitioner has submitted that he has made a representation on 07.04.2003 stating his grievances for granting him pension, but neither the pension has been granted nor the representation has been decided. A short counter affidavit has been filed where it has been mentioned that the services of the petitioner are governed by Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (other than officers) Service Regulations, 1981, and in the corporation, there is no pensionable post. The petitioner was not holding the pensionable post in the corporation on 19.06.1981, therefore, he is not entitled for any pension as well as relief, claimed by him in the writ petition in view of the Government Orders, mentioned above and as such the claim of the petitioner for pension and arrears of pension is liable to be rejected by this Hon’ble Court on this ground alone. 4 In view of the above, the respondents are directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 07.04.2003 by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order taking into consideration the relevant Government Orders. In case, the authority concerned comes to the conclusion that petitioner is entitled for pension, he shall be paid pension along with all the dues. Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 20.03.2006 Rathour