IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 9149 of 2008 Date of decision: 13.10.2011 ________________________________________________________________ Chatter Singh (dead) through LRs. .....Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. & others. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Dharamvir Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. AG with Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. AG. V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral) The original petitioner, late Shri Chatter Singh, died during pendency of the present petition. Consequently, his legal representatives were brought on record to represent his estate as involved in the present petition. 2. The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7(i) and (ii): “7(i) That the respondents may be directed and ordered to count the period of service of the applicant from 06.09.1960 to 31.03.1976 which he had rendered initially under the Panchayat Department and subsequently under the Panchayat Samities and to grant him Pension and other retiral benefits for the said period and as a consequence thereof to revise his pension and other retiral benefits and to pay the difference resulting therefrom the applicant alongwith 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. ...2... interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date due till the actual date of payment thereof. (ii) That the respondent may be further directed to do the needful and to release the arrears of Pension and other retiral benefits, alongwith commutation value of pension, alongwith interest as above, within a period of two months from the date of final disposal of the original application by this Hon'ble Tribunal.” 3. In reply, the respondents have taken the following stand vide para 6(v to vii): “6(v to vii) That in reply to these sub-paras, it is submitted that admittedly services of the applicant was taken over by the government of H.P. w.e.f. 1.6.84 and prior to which from 06.09.1960 to 31.05.1984, he remained as Panchayat Samiti's worker as Panchayat Secretary only w.e.f. 1.6.84 to 31.05.2001 he worked in the respondent department. He worked in the respondent department and upon superannuation he retired as Panchayat inspector on 31.05.2001. The applicant upon superannuation had been granted each and admissible due so found entitled for by counting his past service after absorption in Panchayati Raj Department w.e.f. 1.6.84 to 31.05.201 only the applicant upon absorption in the respondent State, had rendered approximately 17 years services. Accordingly, he stood granted retiral benefits so admissible to him which include pension and other retiral benefits. As per the provision of CCS (Pension) Rule, his past service w.e.f. 06.09.1960 to 31.05.1984 cannot be taken into account in any stretch of imagination. As per the decision taken on 26.9.81 by the respondent Department/State, pertaining to Rural Development Department vide its condition No. 2, admittedly there is a decision of the govt. that the services rendered by the Panchayat Samiti employees in the Panchayat Samiti will be counted towards pension and gratuity irrespective of the fact whether previously ...3... while serving in Panchayat Samiti they have contributed CPF or not. But besides said letter another letter pertaining to Panchayati Raj Deptt. dated 03.01.1990 also exists. As per said office memorandum it was decided by the respondent State/Department that the benefit of pension and gratuity will be given from the date from which Panchayat Secretaries started contributing toward the contributed provident fund subject to their having completed minimum prescribed qualifying service. The share of Panchayat Samiti in the CPF account of these employees and interest thereon shall be deposited into govt. account whereas the employees subscription alongwith interest thereon shall be transferred to the GPF accounts of the employees concerned. In other words in R.D. Deptt. it was decided by the Govt. of H.P. that the absorbed employees past service shall be counted toward pension and gratuity irrespective of the fact whether they have contributed toward CPF or not whereas in the Panchayati Raj Deptt. vide letter dated 03.01.1990 it was decided by the Govt. tht past service of the Panchayat Secretaries shall be counted only if they have contributed in CPF. The said decision appears to have been taken by the Govt. by taking into account huge number of Panchayat Secretaries to be absorbed i.e. 883, by virtue of which financial burden/liability was going to increase many fold on public exchequer. Therefore, the reasonableness as well as rationality of the Govt. by putting different condition in its two letters dated 26.09.1981 and 03.01.1990 that too, of two different departments cannot be questioned being taken in the public interest. As such cannot be termed discrimination amongst Samiti employees. Hence, the past services rendered with the Panchayat Samiti by the applicant has rightly not been counted for pensionary benefits. The copy of these letters are also annexed as Annexure R-II and R- III.” ...4... 4. The deceased original petitioner, late Shri Chatter Singh, was at the relevant time working in the respondent-department as Panchayat Secretary. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits at the very outset that the case of the deceased original petitioner is covered under judgment dated July 31,2008, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1802 of 2002, State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Mr. Basheshar Lal. 5. In view of the above, if on facts the case of the deceased original petitioner is covered under the judgment referred to hereinabove in CWP No. 1802 of 2002 and the same has attained finality and has been implemented and he is similarly situate, he shall also be treated similarly without any discrimination and benefit of the said judgment alongwith consequential benefits, if any, shall be extended to him through the petitioners, being his legal representatives, within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment and the judgment referred to hereinabove by the petitioner before respondent No. 1/competent authority, failing which interest @ 6% per annum shall also be payable. 6. The petition is disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 13th October, 2011 (virender) V.K. Sharma, J.