IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 5822 of 2008 (OA No. 1549 / 1999) Date of decision: 6.11.2009. Habib-Mulla …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K.Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K.Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. R.P.Singh, Asstt. A.G. for respondents No. 1 & 2. Mr. V.B.Verma, Advocate for respondents No. 3 & 4. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioner had joined Rosin and Turpentine Factory, Nahan as unskilled worker in the year 1951 which remained under the control of Industries Department at that time. Thereafter, the Forest Department took over the Factory and lateron it was handed over to the Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation (for short ‘Corporation’) and ultimately the petitioner was absorbed by the Corporation in the year 1974. The petitioner has retired as Distiller on 31.3.1995, but no pensionary benefit has been given to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner had rendered 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes 2 qualifying service of more than 10 years in the Forest Department before the petitioner was absorbed in the Forest Corporation, but the respondent No.1 has not paid any pension to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied judgment dated 2.1.2008 of Division Bench of this Court passed in CWP No. 385 of 2002 State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Ishwar Dass and judgment of this Court dated 21.8.2009 in CWP (T) No. 5728 of 2008 (OA No. 846 of 1999). 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent No.1 that the employees of Rosin and Turpentine Factory were enjoying the benefits as per standing orders when in April 1974 the Corporation took over control of Rosin and Turpentine Factory, Nahan. The respondent No.3 got amended the existing standing orders. No pension was payable prior to 1.4.1974 and none of the factory workers was paid pension. The petitioner has been given retiral benefits as per Clause 32 of the Standing Orders. 3. The respondents No. 3 and 4 have also filed reply and have submitted that prior to 1.4.1974 pension was not payable to any factory worker. The retirees were given benefit at the time of their retirement as admissible under Clause 32 of the Standing Orders. 4. In CWP No. 385 of 2002 decided on 2.1.2008, a Division Bench of this Court after noticing Rule 14(3) of Central Civil Services Pension Rules, held that petitioner in that case is entitled to pensionary benefits for the services rendered by him with respondent /State of Himachal Pradesh prior to his absorption in Forest Corporation. The petitioner has a right to get pension for the 3 period he rendered the services before the State Government subject to the condition that he had rendered service for the minimum qualifying period. 5. The respondents have not disputed the fact that prior to serving the Corporation the petitioner had served in the Forest Department. Therefore, in light of judgment dated 2.1.2008, the petitioner is entitled to pro rata pension for the period he rendered service in State Government prior to his absorption by respondent No.3 - Corporation. The judgment dated 21.8.2009 in CWP (T) No. 5728 of 2008 (OA No. 846/1999) also supports the case of the petitioner. 6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed with a direction that the petitioner is entitled to pro rata pension for the period he rendered service in the State Government subject to the condition that he had rendered minimum qualifying service for earning pension. The arrears of pension payable to the petitioner shall be restricted to the period of three years prior to the date of filing of the Original Application which was filed on 29.4.1999. The arrears of pension shall be calculated and paid to the petitioner by respondent No.1 within a period of three months from today, failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum on such arrears till payment. No costs. ( Kuldip Singh ), November 6, 2009. Judge. (GR)