IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 1261 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 18, 2011 Director, Treasuries and Accounts, Haryana and others ...Appellants Versus Shubh Karan Sharma and others ...Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. J HON'BLE MR. J HON'BLE MR. J HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR USTICE M.M. KUMAR USTICE M.M. KUMAR USTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE M HON'BLE M HON'BLE M HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE . JUSTICE . JUSTICE . JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Indresh Goyal, Addl. AG, Haryana, for the appellants. Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 27.5.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the petitioner-respondents who have rendered service in the Haryana State Minor Irrigation and Tubewell Corporation (for brevity, ‘HSMITC’) before their absorption in the Government Department, would be entitled to count their earlier service for all intents and purposes except seniority. Learned Single Judge has clarified that the grant of pensionary benefit would be subject to the deposit of CPF contribution, gratuity etc. in accordance with the rules or in the alternative the amount equal to CPF contribution and other LPA No. 1261 of 2011 (O&M) 2 payable amount may be deducted by the appellants after working out the pensionary/retiral benefits. 2. Mr. Indresh Goyal, learned State counsel has made an attempt to point out distinguishing feature of the case in hand with the one which has been cited by the learned Single Judge for the purposes of allowing the petition. Learned counsel has, however, confined his prayer that the writ petitioner-respondents cannot be granted every other benefit as the particular prayer made by them also does not claim any such thing. 3. Mr. R.N. Sharma, learned counsel for the writ petitioner-respondents has made a statement that the writ petitioner-respondents would be satisfied if they are given the relief of counting their past service rendered in the HSMITC for the purposes of granting pensionary/retiral benefits, subject to the condition that they would deposit the amount of CPF contribution, which they have already withdrawn from the earlier employer, as per rules. 4. Keeping in view the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the past service rendered by the writ petitioner-respondents with the HSMITC deserves to be counted for the purposes of pension, subject to the condition that they would deposit the amount of CPF contribution with the appellants in accordance with the rules, which has been withdrawn by them. Accordingly, we delete the direction issued by the learned Single Judge that the period of service rendered in HSMITC is to count for all intents and purposes. It is directed that the period is to count only for LPA No. 1261 of 2011 (O&M) 3 the pensionary/retiral benefits. With the aforesaid modification, the appeal is disposed of. The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (GURDE GURDE GURDE GURDEV SINGH V SINGH V SINGH V SINGH) August 1 August 1 August 1 August 18, 2011 , 2011 , 2011 , 2011 JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Pkapoor