Civil Writ Petition No. 17116 of 2009 1 ***** Subhash Setia and others versus State of Haryana and others Present: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana for the State. ***** The petitioners were earlier employed with Haryana Tourism Corporation. As per the petitioners, this Corporation was fully financed and owned by the State government. Subsequently, the decision was taken to absorb the employee of Corporation in the Haryana State Boards/ Corporation/Public Sector Undertaking/Public Enterprises. The petitioners thus were appointed as Section Officer. They have passed the SAS examination. They stands absorbed in the SAS cadre of Finance department, Haryana. Their pay was protected. The petitioners have placed on record the copies of their appointment letters. The grievance raised in the present writ petition is that their prayer for counting of their past service rendered in the Tourism Corporation towards pension and pensionary benefits has not been properly considered. It is averred that the petitioners made a representation that they are prepared to deposit the contribution toward provident fund made by the Government while they were working in the Corporation so that their previous service rendered in the Corporation could be counted towards grant of pension to the petitioners. In support, reliance is placed on Rule 14.30 of C.S.R. Civil Writ Petition No. 17116 of 2009 2 Vol.-II, which reads as under:- 14.30 (1) If a subscriber is permanently transferred to pensionable Service he shall, at his option, be entitled- (a) To continue to subscribe to the Fund, in which case he shall not be entitled to any pension; or (b) to earn pension in respect of such pensionable service, which case, with effect from the date of his permanent transfer- (i)he shall cease to subscriber to the Fund; (ii)the amount of contributions by or Government with interest thereon, standing to his credit in the Fund shall be repaid to Government. (iii)the amount of subscription together with interest thereon standing to his credit in the Fund shall be transferred to his credit in the General Provident Fund, to which thereafter he shall or may subscribe in accordance with the rules of that Fund; and he shall be entitled to count towards pension such part of the period during which he subscribed to the Fund as Government may determine. (2) A subscriber shall communicate his option under clause (1) by letter to the Accounts Officer CAG/FD's within three months of the date of the order transferring him permanently to pensionable service; and if the communication is not received in the office of the Accounts Officer within that period, the subscriber shall be deemed to have exercised his Civil Writ Petition No. 17116 of 2009 3 option in the manner referred to in sub-clause (a) of that clause. Note: Whenever a contract service officer is appointed to a pensionable Government service the provisions of this rule may be brought to the notice of the Government employee concerned by the appointing authority. If the Government employee fails to exercise his option within the prescribed limit, the competent authority will not be prepared to relax the rules unless there are very strong reasons to justify such relaxation. Perusal of the above clears that in Punjab Civil Services Rules applicable to Haryana, the provision for counting the past service rendered, has been stipulated. But the respondents are sitting tight over the matter and even after submission of opinion, no action has been taken. This rule gives an option to an employee who is subscriber to provident fund and has served in pensionable service to either continue or opt for scheme or for pension. The rule, inter alia, provides that to earn pension in respect of such pensionable service, the amount contributed by Government with interest thereon, lying in the credit of the individual shall be re-paid to the government. The grievance of the petitioners is that they made a representation in this regard but their prayer has been rejected for counting their service for pension. Civil Writ Petition No. 17116 of 2009 4 The counsel for the petitioners has taken support from the decision of this Court in CWP No. 18370 of 2009 titled as Shubh Karan Sharma and others versus Chief Secretary to Govt. Haryana and others, decided on 27.05.2010. Apart from dealing with other submissions, this Court has observed that the grant of pensionary benefits shall be subject to deposit of CPF contribution, gratuity etc. in accordance with the rules or alternatively the amount equal to CPF contribution and other payable amount be deducted by the respondents from the pensionary benefits of the petitioners. Since the case of the petitioners is somewhat similar, the request made by the petitioners would also require consideration. The present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to re-consider the request of the petitioners for either depositing the CPF contribution lying in their account or in alternative, deduct this amount for pensionary benefits for counting the service rendered by the petitioners in the Corporation for the purpose of grant of pension. Let this exercise be done within the period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. July 19, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE