1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1424/1995 Dr. S.K. Parimal vs. UOI & Ors. Date of order : 24/3/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri R.K. Mathur for the petitioner. ****** This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that the respondents be directed to grant him seniority from the date he was initially appointed with them on the post of Medical Officer on 14.12.1982. Shri R.K. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner was appointed by the aforesaid order dated 14.12.1982 initially for a term of three months, but his services were extended further from time to time. It would be evident from one such order dated 31.5.1983, that he was given break of one day. Otherwise, he continuously worked with the respondent from 28.12.1986 to 17.3.1986, the date on which he was regularly selected and appointed on the very post of Medical Officer. Learned counsel submitted that the 2 respondents should be directed to count the period of service for seniority and further promotion and grant him all consequential benefits. The respondents in reply to the writ petition contested the writ petition and submitted that there is no rule or law which entitles an ad hoc Medical Officer to count his seniority even if subsequently, he was recruited on regular basis. Petitioner was appointed as Junior Medical Officer on ad hoc basis by way of stop gap arrangement and in between there is also break in service. He was every time appointed for a period of three months or till the recruitment of regular incumbents. There is clear stipulation in the appointment order that it would not confer any right on the petitioner to claim regular appointment. It is therefore prayed that the writ petition be dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has rejoined and submitted that the period of service which the petitioner has rendered to the respondents from 28.12.1982 to 17.3.1986 was followed by his regular appointment with 3 the respondents themselves on 22.3.1986. It was thus continuous service of the petitioner with the same employer on the same post. All this period cannot be ignored at least for the purpose of counting the qualifying period of service for grant of pension. Having heard the learned counsel for the paresis and material on record, I find that the appointment of the petitioner as per the terms contained in initial order dated 14.12.1982 (Annexure-1) was made on various conditions, initially for a period of three months or till recruitment of regular incumbents. This appointment was made on ad hoc basis. It was clearly stated therein that the appointment will confer no special privilege or right on the officer for regular appointment in the grade of Junior Medical Officer or equivalent grade of the CRP Force. There can be therefore no legal justification for granting seniority to the petitioner of such period when he was serving on ad hoc basis particularly because this might affect the seniority of others who were recruited on regular basis with or 4 before the petitioner. However, the claim of the petitioner for counting this period of service towards qualifying period of service for grant of pension is justifiable because even as per the Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension), Rules, 1996 qualifying service of a government servant, may commence from the date he took charge on the post to which he was first appointed either substantively or in officiating or temporary capacity provided that the officiating and temporary service is followed without interruption by substantive appointment in the same post. In the present case, the respondents themselves have stated that technical break of one day used to be given to the petitioner between the two dates of his appointment for duration of three months. Such a period of continuous service of the petitioner, which he rendered to the respondents w.e.f. 28.12.1982 to 17.3.1986 on ad hoc / temporary basis which was followed by his regular appointment with the respondents on the same post, is thus liable to be counted as qualifying for the purpose of pension. 5 This writ petition is partly allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the service of the petitioner from 28.12.1982 to 17.3.1986 as part of qualifying service for the purpose of pension. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/