- 1 - S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6392/2003 (Deva Ram vs. State of Rajasthan) DATE OF ORDER : 1/5/2008 HON'BLE JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.Anil Vyas, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Bhati, Dy. Government Counsel. In this case petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondent to make payment of pension, gratuity, leave encashment, GPF, CPF and remaining wages and also prayed for interest on above dues. The case of petitioner is that he was substantively working on the post of cattle guard in Forest Department and on medical ground he sought voluntary retirement w.e.f. 7/7/99 when he was working in the office of Deputy Conservator of Forest, Arawali Vraksharopan Pariyojana, Chittorgarh. For the purpose of voluntary retirement, a letter was written by Deputy Conservator of Forest, Arawali to Divisional Forest Officer, Jodhpur and his service record was sent to said authority. The application of petitioner for voluntary retirement was accepted vide order dated 7/7/99 by the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Arawali Vraksharopan Pariyojana, Chittorgarh. After acceptance of voluntary retirement, petitioner made request for releasing his - 2 - retiral benefits but no retiral benefits have been paid to him, therefore, he has preferred writ petition before this court. Before approaching this Court, petitioner has also made several representations but respondents have not paid any heed to them. The contention of counsel for petitioner is that the application for voluntary retirement was accepted in accordance with Rule 50 of Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 in which the condition precedent for accepting voluntary retirement is that the incumbent should have completed 15 years of qualifying service, therefore, obviously, at the time of acceptance of application of petitioner for voluntary retirement, the respondents have accepted that petitioner has completed 15 years of service but after accepting the prayer of petitioner for voluntary retirement no retiral benefits were given to him including pension. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that action of respondents is illegal and unconstitutional and against the basic principle of law hence petitioner is entitled for direction to respondents to make payment of retiral benefits including pension. In reply, it is contended by learned counsel for the respondents that petitioner is not entitled for pensionary benefits - 3 - as he has not completed 15 years of qualifying service, therefore, there is no question of granting him any pensionary benefits. I have considered the rival submissions. It is strange that application of petitioner for voluntary retirement was accepted in accordance with Rule 50 of Rules of 1996 while treating that petitioner has completed 15 years of qualifying service but retiral benefits were denied to him while saying that he had not put in 15 years of qualifying service. In my opinion, respondents cannot take advantage of their action at a later stage after accepting the application for voluntary retirement in accordance with Rule 50 of Rules of 1996 according to which 15 years of minimum service is required for getting pensionary benefits. If voluntary retirement application of petitioner has been accepted even before completing 15 years of service by the petitioner then too respondents are under obligation to give effect to voluntary retirement w.e.f. date when petitioner completes 15 years of service. In similar circumstances, learned Single Judge of this Court in case of Saroj Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2347/2003) held that even after application for voluntary retirement is accepted prior to completing 15 years - 4 - qualifying service, the pensionary benefits cannot be denied to an employee and for granting all pensionary benefits respondents shall treat an employee voluntarily retired w.e.f. date on which he completes 15 years of qualifying service. In view of above discussion, this writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner while shifting the effect of voluntary retirement from the date petitioner completed 15 years of service because petitioner's application for voluntary retirement was accepted by the respondents under Rule 50 of Rules of 1996 and shall extend all the benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. pankaj baweja