Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Ram Lal Gupta v. State of Punjab & Ors - CWP-7113-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 1984 (24 March 2006)


Civil Writ Petition 7113 of 2004

Date of decision: 28.2.2006.

Ram Lal Gupta ...Petitioner


State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.S.NIJJAR.

Present: Mr Kulwinder Singh, Advocate, for Mr BS Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mrs Charu Tuli, Sr DAG Punjab for respondents-1,2 and 5.

Mr Pradip Bhandari, Advocate, for respondents-3 and 4.


The petitioner initially worked as Clerk/Assistant in the Department of Agriculture (Horticulture and Soil Conservation) under the Punjab Government from 11.5.1962 to 25.8.1975. Thereafter, he was appointed as Superintendent with the Local Government Department on 26.8.1975 and he retired as Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Abohar on 31.12.1999. In this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the quashing of the order dated 5.2.2004 (Annexure P2) passed by the Director, Local Government Punjab (respondent No.2) has been sought to the extent the period of service rendered by the petitioner from 11.5.1962 to 25.8.1975 in the Department of Agriculture has not been taken into account towards qualifying service.

Written statement has been filed by the Additional Secretary, Department of Local Government, Punjab, on behalf of respondents-1, 2 and 5. It is stated that the matter with regard to treating the service rendered in the Punjab Government prior to joining the Municipal Council's service CWP 7113 of 2004

was under consideration of the State Government and vide letter dated 2.12.2005 (Annexure R1), a policy decision has been taken to the effect that the service of such employees who served under the Punjab Government immediately before joining the service of Municipal Corporation/Council/Improvement Trust, will be treated as "Qualifying Service" for determination of pensionary benefits. The Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Phagwara (respondent No.4) has filed a separate reply wherein it has been submitted that the pension share of the petitioner for the period from 25.5.1976 to 12.6.1979 amounting to Rs 2809/- has been deposited with the Director, Local Government (respondent No.2) and in view of the same, it is submitted, nothing is due from respondent No.4 to the petitioner.

The primary claim of the petitioner, as already noticed, is for taking into account the period of service rendered by him from 11.5.1962 to 25.8.1975 towards "Qualifying Service" for pension. The same has been acceded to by the State Government in terms of letter dated 2.12.2005 (Annexure R1). In terms of the said letter, the period of service rendered by the petitioner under the Punjab Government immediately before joining the service of Municipal Council is to be treated as "Qualifying Service" for determination of pensionary benefits provided that the service benefits of such service accrued to the employees under Rule 5.3(2) of Punjab Civil Service Rules Volume II immediately on his relieving by the previous department are deposited with the Municipal Council concerned. Further, in case the service benefits under the aforesaid Rule have not accrued or paid to the employee, in that case the employee would be required to deposit all the retrial benefits/pension contribution and leave salary amount for such service period with the Municipal Council concerned. In case of non- deposit of service benefits, etc., immediately before joining the Municipal CWP 7113 of 2004

Council, interest @ 12% is to be charged for the period of delay, as per the policy decision taken vide memo dated 9.11.2004.

Keeping in view the written statement filed by respondents-1, 2 and 5 and also the letter dated 2.12.2005 (Annexure R1) issued by the Directorate of Local Government, Punjab, Chandigarh (Pension Branch), the writ petition is allowed and the "Qualifying Service" of the petitioner be calculated and determined in accordance with the letter dated 2.12.2005 (Annexure R1).



28.2 .2006. ( S.S.SARON )



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.