-: 1 :- HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Application No. 1922 of 2009 IN Writ Petition No. 5201 of 2008 Union of India. ..Applicant. Versus Kamal Vithal Zalte. ..Respondent. Mr. Sureshkumar a/w Mr. T. J. Pandian for the Applicant. Mr. R. P. Saxesna for the respondent. Coram : S. B. Mhase & R. M. Savant, JJ. Date : August 7, 2009. P. C. : 1. Heard. The Respondent has rendered the service as follows : Sr. No. Period Post held Under whom worked 1. 19-5-75 to 31-12-80 5-y. 7-m 13-d. Casual & MRCL, Khalasi Dy. Chief Engineer (C) Central Railway Bhusawal. 2. 1-1-81 to 23-11-89 8-y 10-m 23-d Temporary Khalasi As above. 3. 24-11-81 to 30-11-94 5-y and 7-d. Gangman Chief PWI (ML) (C) Central Railway, Bhusawal. 2. So far as the calculation of service of the Respondent for the pensionary benefits is concerned, learned counsel appearing on -: 2 :- behalf of the Applicant states that the temporary service rendered by the Respondent from 1-1-1981 to 23-11-1989 can be considered for the purpose of extending pensionary benefits to the Respondent as provided in the Rules, i.e., 50% of the service rendered by the Respondent as temporary will be taken into account for fixing the pension. Rightly, the Central Administrative Tribunal has also directed to calculate the 50% of the said temporary service. 3. The dispute before this Court is in respect of the service rendered by the Respondent as Casual labourer from 19-5-1975 till 31-12-1980. The grievance is made that the said temporary service cannot be taken into consideration since the pension Rules are not applicable to the casual labourers. 4. Mr. Sureshkumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2008) 2 SCC 108 in the matter of General Manager North West Railway & Others v/s. Chanda Devi and also on the unreported judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Union of India and Others v/s. K. G. Radhakrishana Panicker & Others. -: 3 :- 5. In reply to this, the learned counsel for the Respondent relies upon the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in 2004(2) Administrative Total Judgments page 24, in the matter of General Manager, South Central Railway & Anr. v/s. Shaik Abdul Khader. All these judgments are in respect of the railway employees. 6. The Apex Court in the matter of General Manager North West Railway & Others v/s. Chanda Devi reported in (2008) 2 SCC 108, has held that the service rendered as casual labourer cannot be considered for the purpose of calculating the pensionary benefits. Therefore, taking into consideration this aspect we partly allow the instant civil application. We therefore only stay the direction of the CAT to consider the half of the casual service rendered by the Respondent for calculating the pensionary benefits of the Respondent. 7. The Applicant is directed to calculate the provisional pension of the Respondent, if the Respondent is eligible, taking into consideration the temporary service rendered by the Respondent and thereafter the complete regular service rendered by the Respondent. The further directions, if any, will be given in the light of the decision -: 4 :- that will be rendered in the above petition. The exercise of fixing the provisional pension shall be completed within a period of six weeks from today. The arrears of pension from the date of retirement of the Respondent shall be given to the Respondent within a period of eight weeks from today. 8. In view of this order, hearing of the contempt petition is stayed. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.)